The Supreme Court has fixed April 14 for the hearing of Mark’s appeal against Nafiu Bala’s suit, which questions Mark’s leadership position. Mark’s appeal is marked SC/CV/180/2026, and he is seeking to overturn the Court of Appeal’s decision that deemed his case as incompetent and unmeritorious.

On March 12, 2026, the Court of Appeal ruled against Mark, a decision that has significant implications for the ADC’s internal dynamics. Following this ruling, on April 1, the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) announced it would no longer recognize the factions of the ADC led by either Mark or Bala, further complicating the leadership crisis.

In response to INEC’s announcement, Mark filed a motion requesting the court to compel INEC to restore their names and recognize them as members of the party’s national working committee. This legal maneuver highlights the urgency and complexity of the situation as both factions vie for legitimacy.

The Supreme Court has also scheduled a hearing for April 22 in another related appeal filed by Mark regarding the leadership dispute in the ADC. A five-member panel of the Supreme Court, led by Justice Mohammed Garba, granted accelerated hearing in this matter, indicating the court’s recognition of the case’s significance.

In a separate ruling, the Supreme Court set aside the judgment of the Court of Appeal concerning the appointment of counsel for Nestoil and Neconde, affirming that these entities remain valid legal entities with the right to engage counsel of their choice. This ruling may set a precedent for how legal disputes are handled within corporate governance and political party structures.

As the April 14 hearing approaches, the ADC’s leadership crisis continues to unfold, with both Mark and Bala preparing for what could be a pivotal moment for the party. The outcome of this appeal could determine the future of the ADC and its leadership structure, which has been under scrutiny since the initial suit was filed by Bala on September 2, 2025, to restrain INEC from recognizing Mark-led executives.

Details remain unconfirmed regarding the potential implications of the Supreme Court’s decisions on the ADC’s internal politics and its recognition by INEC. The political landscape may shift dramatically depending on the court’s rulings in the coming weeks, particularly as the parties involved await the Supreme Court’s judgment.

The post Supreme Court to Hear Appeal by David Mark on April 14 appeared first on Toprecruitment.

The recent ruling by the Supreme Court of Nigeria raises a pivotal question: What are the implications of the court’s decision regarding the legal dispute between Polaris Bank and the Asset Management Corporation of Nigeria (AMCON)? The court ruled in favor of AMCON, affirming its authority to sell the Lagos Continental Hotel, which had been a point of contention.

The Supreme Court’s decision, delivered on February 20, 2026, effectively settled a long-standing legal dispute involving multiple parties, including Polaris Bank Limited, AMCON, 11 Hospitality Plc, and Milan Industries Limited. The court’s ruling came after a series of legal challenges initiated by Milan Industries, which had previously secured a loan from Polaris Bank for the hotel’s construction.

The loan became non-performing, leading to AMCON acquiring the Eligible Bank Asset from Polaris Bank in September 2018. Subsequently, AMCON sold the Lagos Continental Hotel for ₦22 billion to 11 Hospitality Plc. However, Milan Industries filed a lawsuit challenging this sale, which was dismissed by the Federal High Court.

Following the dismissal, Milan Industries appealed the decision to the Court of Appeal, which initially ruled in favor of the company. This ruling was later set aside by the Supreme Court, which upheld AMCON’s authority to proceed with the sale.

The Supreme Court also affirmed that AMCON is exempt from paying stamp duties under Section 60 of the AMCON Act, a significant point that underscores the agency’s unique legal standing. The court stated, “The AMCON Act is a special law enacted by the National Assembly to tackle peculiar problems in the financial industry.”

Furthermore, the ruling validated AMCON’s rights as a mortgagee, regardless of any upstamping of mortgage documents. The court emphasized that as long as there is an outstanding debt, AMCON retains a continuing security interest in the mortgaged assets.

This legal resolution marks a critical moment for the banking and real estate sectors in Nigeria, particularly as the country navigates economic challenges, including a current inflation rate of 15.1% and fluctuating foreign investment flows.

As the dust settles on this legal battle, the implications for future banking practices and asset management in Nigeria remain to be seen. The ruling not only clarifies AMCON’s authority but also sets a precedent for similar disputes in the financial sector.

Details remain unconfirmed regarding the broader impact of this ruling on Polaris Bank’s operations and its future dealings with AMCON and other entities.

The post Polaris Bank Legal Dispute with AMCON Resolved by Supreme Court appeared first on Toprecruitment.