I was before the Federal High Court today to argue a Motion Ex Parte for substituted service and I met exactly what I was prepared for.
Normally, the popular/common practice is that before you bring an application for substituted service, you must have attempted personal service and if unsuccessful, then the bailiff/sheriff of the court will depose to affidavit of non-service, which will be exhibited or attached to the application.
Even though, the rules recognise an instance where you need not have made attempts to personal service, most judges have the disposition towards ensuring that personal service is attempted before filing MEP. Also, for substituted service, the usual mode is by pasting or delivery via post or email.
But in my own case, I have not attempted personal service, so no affidavit of non-service was filed; and I did not desire to serve by pasting or delivery via post or email; instead, I wanted to serve a customer of a bank through the bank.
When I attempted to move the application, the Court was reluctant, and asked why I was bringing such an application to serve a customer of a bank through the bank. In response, I simply told the court that: the purpose of service is to bring the pendency of the suit to the attention of the customer, who is a party to the suit, and it is the bank who knows the address of the customer and can effectively bring the pendency of the suit to the customer. So it is only appropriate and the most practicable option is to serve the customer through the bank.
After some moments, my lord was convinced, asked that I moved the application and granted as prayed.
It’s funny how, growing up, we couldn’t relate to some of our fathers’ sacrifices. Then adulthood sets in, and you don’t just understand it you start living it.The money you make already has foreseen and unforeseen bills waiting for it. 😞
#Adulthood#life
LAWYER TO LAWYER
When you start making money from law practice, TRAVEL.
Don’t wait till when you have enough. It doesn’t have to be Europe, America or some exotic destination. Start with neighbouring countries if necessary. Just go beyond the environment that formed you.
There is a level of peak intelligence you will never attain if you don’t travel, as no law school, no textbook and no courtroom experience can give you. It only comes from exposure. Education gives you knowledge, Exposure gives you context.
You have probably met some people with little or no education who are remarkably wealthy and successful. Yet, in certain conversations, you immediately recognise the difference education makes with your own reasoning and approach, not because they lack intelligence, but because education expands the range of ideas, perspectives and frameworks available to you.
Travel does the same thing. It is education through exposure and when you’re educated but lack exposure, there are certain conversations or arguments you will make and people will immediately recognise you lack exposure. This is very bad for a lawyer.
For a lawyer, the returns are not just personal, they are professional. Exposure sharpens how you read people, how you construct arguments, it sharpens your judgment on how you anticipate outcomes, broadens your perspective and eventually influences how you advise clients, negotiate fees and even structure transactions. It makes you a more complete thinker and a more formidable practitioner.
You begin to understand that what your environment taught you was “normal” may simply be just one way of doing things.
Travel is not merely recreation. It should not be optional for a lawyer. It is not simply a reward for success. It is a requirement for the kind of excellence that makes success sustainable. It gives you a competitive advantage.
Another year, another reason to be grateful.
I am deeply grateful for the gift of life, God's unwavering faithfulness, and the incredible people He has placed in my journey.
Here's to greater accomplishments, new opportunities
#Newage#Godsgift
The National Industrial Court in Jonathan Moses v Kaduna State Govt(2026) has held that threatening an employee with dismissal merely for seeking judicial redress as "asinine" and "a medieval act in the 21st Century."
Today's court session was funny. I went to the court with my principal. A few minutes after my principal stepped out to ease himself, our case was called.
I stood up confidently: My Lord, I am Najib Adamu Usman, for the defendant. I am appearing with my principal who just stepped out to ease himself.
My Lord: Counsel, how is it possible for you to appear with your principal?
*My eyes blur while I took the hint of the court.
Me: My Lord, My Principal is appearing with me.
My Lord: Better.
The whole court bursts out laughing 😂😂😂
Going a step further will always distinguish you in whatever you do. Often, I see submissions like: "The case of A v. B cited by the Claimant does not apply here. We urge your lordship to discountenance it" and many colleagues stop at that.
It isn't a court that should become a Knight errand to look for the inapplicability and apply it for you. I know it isn't easy, and I'm not suggesting that I am better, but try to take it further. It elevates your argument and shows that you're a thorough lawyer. There are many good lawyers, so imbibe the "small" things that might set you apart.
What of:
"The case of A v. B cited by the Claimant does not apply here. In the case of A v. B, the point in contention was whether Exhibit A, a computer generated public document, having been certified by the authority, requires an additional need for a certificate of compliance. In the case under reference, the court answered in the affirmative, holding that both requirements must be met. In the instant case before your lordship, Exhibit C is a computer generated document, but Xyz is not a public authority. Thus, the certificate of compliance alone suffices."
"If I do that for all the cases they cited, how would I meet deadlines?"
You do not have to read the full decisions in urgent or emergency situations. Research platforms like Lawpavilion and NWLR allow you to read in context. So, you can jump to the part you need without missing out on the context leading to the point made by the court.
Learn to go a step further. It will always count for you.
The Supreme Court in the case of Ugbah Vs Ugbah (2026) 4 NWLR 479 SC precisely at (p 511, Para E) per Abiru JSC held that:
'It is not permissible for a Man to marry until he is financially able to bear the maintenance expenses. The Prophet, peace be unto him, commanded those who cannot afford it to persevere and fast.'
As a Single Nigerian Male Bachelor, quote this case for anyone pressuring you to go and marry, despite the dwindling economy.
Sometimes this law practice no be by emotion. If you dey too emotional, clients go take advantage of it.
You have to separate feelings from work, stay professional, and stand your ground.
#Litigation#Younglawyers#Lawpractice
Litigation is not for the weak😤
Moved between two courts yesterday. Finished early in the first, got to the second and saw a packed bar with lawyers already arguing over year of call 😂 I knew instantly my matter would come late
Left court after 4pm, exhausted from waiting.
I owe a lot of people. At every stage of my life, someone showed up guiding me, pushing me, making me better.
That’s why I keep grinding. Not just for me, but for everyone who believed in me… and for the universe that aligned it all.