News Highlights:
- Former Pan African Towers CEO, Azeez Amida, alleges the company is using procedural tactics to delay the resolution of a severance dispute dating back to his November 2024 exit.
- The National Industrial Court adjourned the matter to July 6, 2026, after questioning why Pan African Towers Limited filed a preliminary objection without a substantive defence.
Fresh concerns have surfaced in the legal dispute between former Pan African Towers CEO, Azeez Amida, and Pan African Towers Limited, amid allegations that the company is deploying procedural strategies to stall substantive resolution of the case instead of addressing the core issues in contention.
Court filings indicate that severance entitlements owed to Amida under a Mutual Separation Agreement signed after his departure from the company in November 2024 have remained unsettled nearly eighteen months later.
Although the suit has been before the National Industrial Court since June 2025, Pan African Towers is reportedly yet to file a substantive defence challenging the claims. Rather, the company has reportedly focused on a preliminary objection, arguing that Amida failed to comply with mandatory mediation provisions and should have pursued arbitration instead of litigation.
The matter came before Honourable Justice Essien of the National Industrial Court, Lagos Division, on Tuesday, where counsel for Pan African Towers, Mr. Mofesomo Tayo-Oyetibo, with Chukwudi Nwudike and Amira Omodu, urged the Court to decline jurisdiction pursuant to Clause 13A and or refer the matter to arbitration vide 13B of the Mutual Separation Agreement.
Counsel representing Amida from Pinheiro LP, Bolu Agbaje Akadri, leading Emeka Ekweozor and Ukamaka Ali, opposed the application, arguing that multiple attempts had previously been made to resolve the matter, including formal demands for performance under the agreement, before the suit was filed.
During proceedings, the Court reportedly queried the absence of a substantive defence alongside the preliminary objection, describing the approach as procedurally improper before electing to hear the application.
It is Amida’s position that an attempt was made in line with the Mutual Separation Agreement to have the matter resolved amicably with no success, whilst reliance on arbitration, which is optional under the agreement, at this stage appears inconsistent with prior conduct, noting that no meaningful steps had allegedly been taken to initiate arbitration proceedings before the matter was brought before the Court.
“The substance of the dispute remains unanswered,” Amida states. “The concern is whether procedural manoeuvres are being deployed to postpone accountability rather than resolve the issues in contention.”
The Court has now adjourned the matter to 6 July 2026 for ruling on the preliminary objection.
The dispute is attracting increasing attention within legal, business, and corporate governance circles due to its potential implications for executive separation agreements, contractual enforcement, and dispute resolution mechanisms within Nigeria’s corporate environment.
Observers note that the eventual outcome could influence how arbitration clauses, executive transition obligations, and post-transaction disputes are approached in future corporate matters.
The matter remains before the Court.
