From Victor Osula, Abuja
The Federal High Court in Abuja, on Monday, stalled hearing in the Code of Conduct Bureau’s (CCB) suit seeking the final forfeiture of a United Kingdom property linked to the late former Minister of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT), Gen. Jeremiah Useni (retd.), Chief Mike Ozekhome, SAN, after faulting service of court processes on the respondents.
The case, listed for mention before Justice Binta Nyako, could not proceed after the court held that the respondents were not properly served with the motion for final forfeiture and hearing notice.
Marked FHC/ABJ/CS/2333/2025, the suit lists the Administrators of the Estate of late Useni, the Executors of the Estate of late Useni and the property at No. 79, Randall Avenue, Neasden, London NW2 7SX, as 1st to 3rd respondents respectively.
In the motion on notice dated December 18, 2025, and filed December 22, 2025, the CCB, through its counsel, Sufyan Ahmad, sought an order of final forfeiture of the London property, which it said was reasonably suspected to have been acquired with proceeds of unlawful activity.
Ahmad argued that the court had the inherent and statutory powers under Sections 7, 17, 19 and 67 of the Proceeds of Crime (Recovery and Management) Act, 2022, and Sections 6 and 44 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended), to grant the reliefs sought. He told the court that an interim preservation order had been granted on November 28, 2025, directing publication of the order to enable interested parties to show cause why the property should not be forfeited to the Federal Government, adding that no individual or authority had filed any objection.
However, when the matter was called, no counsel appeared for the respondents. Although Ahmad maintained that service had been effected, Justice Nyako questioned the mode of service.
The lawyer said court processes were first taken to one of the deceased’s properties in Jos but the bailiff was informed that Useni no longer resided there. He said they were later directed to a law firm, which declined service, before the documents were eventually served on Useni’s daughter in Abuja.
Justice Nyako asked whether the daughter was an administrator of the estate or named on the face of the processes, to which Ahmad answered in the negative. He also admitted he was unaware of whether the deceased left a will.
Faulting the service, the judge said the CCB ought to apply for substituted service so that anyone with interest in the matter, particularly in respect of the third respondent property, could be properly notified.
She adjourned the matter to February 25 for mention.
In an affidavit in support of the motion deposed to by a CCB investigator, Raji Rasaq, it was stated that following the interim preservation order, a publication was made in a widely circulated national newspaper inviting interested parties to show cause within 14 days why the property should not be forfeited, but no response ws received.
Rasaq further disclosed that the First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) of the United Kingdom, in suit REF/2023/0155, had ruled that the late Useni was the true owner of the property, having purchased it under a fictitious name to conceal his identity as beneficial owner.
He said the property was acquired during Useni’s tenure in public office and that a net worth analysis conducted by the Financial Investigation and Forensic Accounting Unit (FIFAU) of the CCB, using remuneration data from the Revenue Mobilisation, Allocation and Fiscal Commission (RMAFC), showed that Useni’s declared income was grossly insufficient to fund the purchase.
According to him, the analysis revealed substantial unexplained funds, indicating possible fraud, unreported income or illicit accumulation of wealth.
Rasaq said Useni’s asset declaration form, already annexed as an exhibit, showed that he declared ownership of the property despite purchasing it under a fictitious name, adding that it would be in the interest of justice for the court to grant a final forfeiture order in favour of the Federal Government.
The London property has also been the subject of dispute involving Ozekhome at the UK First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber), Land Registration, under case number REF/2023/0155.
The matter was heard by the First-tier Tribunal (Property Chamber) Land Registration, UK, under case number REF/2023/0155, with Tali Shani listed as applicant and Ozekhome as respondent. While Ozekhome claimed he received the property as a gift from “Mr Tali Shani” in 2021, lawyers representing “Ms Tali Shani” insisted she was the rightful owner.
However, the tribunal dismissed all claims, holding that neither “Mr” nor “Ms” Tali Shani existed, and ruled that the actual owner of the property was the late Jeremiah Useni.
