Federal High Court Lagos Admits Offer Letter in ₦152m Oak Homes Property Fraud Trial, Adjourns Ruling on Virtual Proceedings
The Federal High Court in Lagos has admitted a February 5, 2024, offer letter into evidence in the ongoing trial of property developer Olukayode Olusanya and his company, Oak Homes Ltd, over an alleged ₦152 million property fraud.
Justice Musa Kakaki admitted the document on Tuesday but rejected three other documents dated January 10, January 11 and December 15, 2024, because they were photocopies and the witness seeking to tender them failed to explain the whereabouts of their original copies.
The judge subsequently adjourned the case until December 3, 2026, for a ruling on a prosecution application seeking permission to conduct virtual proceedings on health grounds.
The ruling followed objections raised during proceedings on July 20, 2026, when the prosecution attempted to tender the documents through the nominal complainant, Anthony Ugbebor.
In his ruling, Justice Kakaki held that the witness had not provided a satisfactory explanation for the absence of the original copies of the three rejected documents.
The judge noted that the objection was based partly on the fact that the documents were photocopies and that the witness had failed to explain what happened to the originals.
However, the court dismissed the objection to the February 5, 2024, offer letter, which was challenged on the grounds that Ugbebor was not its maker.
Justice Kakaki ruled that the objection lacked a sufficient legal basis and admitted the offer letter into evidence.
Following the ruling, prosecuting counsel, Chief Superintendent of Police Monday Omo-Osagie, informed the court that he had an interlocutory application ready for hearing. He said the defendants had been served and had filed their responses.
Counsel for the first defendant, Adeleke Agboola, SAN, questioned whether Omo-Osagie was still serving in the police, claiming he had received information that the prosecutor had retired.
Agboola asked the prosecutor to clarify whether he was appearing under a fiat, or special authorisation to conduct the prosecution. He also maintained that his office had not been served with the application.
According to him, the application was not ready for hearing and appeared to be an attempt to reopen an issue the court had already decided.
Agboola argued that the prosecution should either call its witness or close its case to allow the defence to begin presenting its case.
Counsel for the second defendant, Jude Ehiedu, also questioned the prosecutor’s status and argued that the application amounted to an abuse of court process because a similar request had previously been rejected.
Omo-Osagie, however, maintained that he remained a serving police officer until he received a certificate of discharge.
He explained that the application was filed on September 21, 2026, and that the first defendant was served on September 30. He also said he received the defendants’ responses electronically on Monday.
The prosecutor further clarified that the application concerned the nominal complainant’s health and was different from an earlier request seeking permission for the witness to testify virtually because he was residing outside Nigeria.
Justice Kakaki initially said the application was not in the court file and directed the prosecutor to check with the registry to confirm whether it had been properly filed.
When proceedings resumed, Omo-Osagie informed the court that a search at the registry showed the application had been delivered and signed for by a registrar in the judge’s court identified as Elizabeth.
He subsequently presented another copy of the application and urged the court to consider the request.
The prosecutor moved the motion on notice, dated September 18 and filed on September 21, 2026. He said it was supported by a 12-paragraph affidavit and a written address, which he adopted in asking the court to grant the reliefs sought.
Ehiedu objected to the prosecution’s response to the defendants’ counter-affidavits, arguing that the prosecutor had not filed a reply on points of law.
Meanwhile, Benson Nwosu, who appeared for Agboola, argued that an earlier application seeking virtual testimony had been dismissed by the court on June 23, 2026.
He maintained that the prosecution should appeal that decision rather than file another application seeking substantially the same relief.
Nwosu also argued that if the nominal complainant could not appear physically, the prosecution should close its case.
He urged the court to dismiss the application, while counsel for the second defendant adopted the same arguments.
After hearing the parties, Justice Kakaki adjourned the matter until December 3, 2026, for a ruling on the application.
At the July 20 proceedings, Ugbebor told the court that he entered into the property transaction with Olusanya in November 2017 after receiving assurances that Oak Homes was a reputable developer capable of delivering a retirement home in Nigeria.
He said he signed the agreement and returned it by email before making payments in line with the contract.
According to the witness, the agreement tied payments to performance milestones, requiring verifiable and satisfactory completion of work at different stages of the project.
Ugbebor testified that he made four payments between November 2017 and December 2020, totalling ₦152 million. The amount represented 80 per cent of the ₦190 million purchase price for two flats on the second floor of the development.
He described the money as his life savings, equivalent to approximately $400,000 at the prevailing exchange rates.
Explaining why he referred to the dollar equivalent, Ugbebor told the court that his income was denominated in dollars. He further alleged that Olusanya began acting suspiciously after receiving the payments.
The witness said the project was scheduled for completion on February 28, 2019, but construction later stalled.
He added that he sent a representative to inspect the site on October 11, 2022, after becoming concerned about the project’s progress.
Ugbebor said he eventually petitioned the Assistant Inspector-General of Police at the Zone 2 Command in Lagos on December 10, 2023, after concluding that the transaction had been fraudulently handled.
The case remains ongoing, with the court expected to rule on the prosecution’s application for virtual proceedings on December 3, 2026.
