By Musa Mohammed
Proceedings resumed at the Federal High Court of Nigeria, Abuja Judicial Division, on Monday in the ongoing suit filed by Chief Uche Geoffrey Nnaji against the University of Nigeria, Nsukka.
Other respondents in the matter include the Vice Chancellor and the former acting Vice Chancellor of UNN and others, with fresh revelations that the push for an out-of-court settlement originated from the respondents’ legal team.
Dr. Robert Ngwu, Special Adviser to Chief Uche Geoffrey Nnaji, former Minister of Innovation, Science and Technology, while reacting to some misleading reports in the media, said that it was UNN and other respondents that called for an out of court settlement through their lawyers.
He said that the matter, presided over by Honourable Justice H. J. Yilwa, came up on Monday following an earlier adjournment on February 26, 2026, and focused on both procedural developments and the status of settlement discussions between the parties.
Appearances and Representation
According to Ngwu, “At the hearing, the Applicant, Chief Uche Geoffrey Nnaji, was represented by Opeyemi Muritala, Esq., leading a legal team from the chambers of Chief Wole Olanipekun, SAN, and Prof. Sebastine Hon, SAN.
“The 3rd–7th Respondents were represented by Mr. Chidubem Ugwunweze, Esq., from the chambers of Chief Chris Uche, SAN, alongside other counsel. Separate counsel also appeared for the 1st and 2nd Respondents, namely the Minister of Education and the National Universities Commission,”
Respondents Initiate Settlement Moves
He explained that contrary to circulating claims in the media, it was clearly established in open court that the initiative for an out-of-court settlement came from the respondents being the University of Nigeria, Nsukka.
The Minister’s aide said that based on the respondents appeal for an out of court settlement, the Applicant informed the court that he had been briefed about ongoing settlement discussions and sought an adjournment to allow parties explore that option.
According to him, the counsel to the 3rd–7th Respondents confirmed that their principal, Chief Chris Uche, SAN, UNN’s lawyer, had earlier engaged Chief Wole Olanipekun, SAN on the possibility of settlement; discussions toward settlement were ongoing; and they had no objection to the request for adjournment.
He however said that counsel to the 1st and 2nd Respondents told the court that they were not previously aware of the discussions but did not oppose either the adjournment or the prospect of settlement.
“This sequence of events firmly places the origin of settlement overtures with the respondents’ counsel, not the Applicant,” Ngwu maintained.
Court Declines Late Filing Application
He said that despite acknowledging settlement discussions, counsel to the 3rd–7th Respondents also applied to regularise processes filed out of time but the court declined the application, ruling that such issues would only be entertained if settlement efforts fail.
This development he said highlights continuing procedural deficiencies associated with the respondents’ filings.
Adjournment Granted
“With the consent of all parties, the court adjourned the matter to July 8, 2026, for either a report of settlement or continuation of hearing,” The Special Adviser said.
Case Background
Ngwu said that the suit filed by his principal seeks, among other reliefs; an order restraining the 3rd–7th Respondents from interfering with the Applicant’s academic records; and a directive compelling the release of his complete academic records from the University of Nigeria, Nsukka.
He explained that the case which touches on records dating back over four decades, has drawn public interest due to its implications for institutional transparency and accountability.
Clarification of Positions
“Legal observers should note that Chief Uche Geoffrey Nnaji is the Applicant, and not a respondent; as he merely acknowledged settlement discussions initiated by the opposing side.
“Any claims suggesting that it was Chief Nnaji that sought for settlement is inaccurate and misleading,” he clarified.
Conclusion
Ngwu said that the latest proceedings underscore two key developments which are the ongoing settlement overtures initiated by the respondents’ counsel, and persistent procedural challenges in their filings.
“As the matter progresses, the court’s directive for a settlement report or hearing in July is expected to determine the next phase of the case, with stakeholders closely watching for clarity and resolution grounded in due process,” he added.
