Mauritz Walton Nigeria Limited has petitioned the Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Committee against Mohammed Ndarani Mohammed, SAN, alleging a grave breach of the Rules of Professional Conduct bordering on conflict of interest, violation of client confidentiality, and conduct unbecoming of a legal practitioner.
![](https://thenigerialawyer.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/09/2026-IDRI-Masterclass.png")
The petition, dated 8 September 2026, is addressed to the Secretary of the Committee at the Body of Benchers Complex, Plot 688, Institute and Research District, Jabi, Abuja, and copied to the senior advocate himself.
It is supported by an affidavit deposed to by Dr. Maurice I. Ibe, described as Group Executive Chairman, Managing Consultant and Authorised Representative of the company, of No. 5 Vistula Close, Ministers Hill, Maitama, which carries the stamp of the Commissioner for Oaths at the Registry of the Committee dated 14 September 2026.
The petition is expressed to be brought pursuant to Rule 55(2) of the Rules of Professional Conduct for Legal Practitioners, and states that it “highlights an egregious, concurrent conflict of interest that inflicts extreme scandal upon the legal profession, violates the sacred duty of corporate fidelity, and actively subverts the fair administration of justice.”
The Rules Relied Upon
The petition identifies the provisions it says were breached.
It states that Rule 17(1) requires a lawyer to disclose all conflicting relations or connections to a controversy before accepting a retainer; that Rule 17(2) provides that except with the client’s consent after full disclosure, a lawyer shall not accept a retainer if his professional judgment is or may reasonably be affected by personal, business or financial interests; and that Rule 17(4) provides that a lawyer shall not accept proffered employment if the exercise of his independent professional judgment is likely to be adversely affected, or if it involves representing differing interests.
It also relies on Rule 1, which requires a lawyer to uphold and observe the rule of law, promote and foster the cause of justice, maintain a high standard of professional conduct and completely abstain from conduct unbecoming of a legal practitioner.
The petition states that the Federal Government and various state governments routinely engaged in foreign loan reconciliations regarding excess debits from the Paris and London Club refunds, and that, recognising the complexity of those international finance over-deductions, the Government of Benue State, along with other sub-nationals, appointed the company as expert financial consultants to forensically analyse, reconcile and recover the excess debits under the first line charge.
To enforce payment of its consultancy fees from defaulting state governments which refused to pay after receiving their refunds, the company says it took the senior advocate “into absolute corporate confidence,” held extensive and highly sensitive strategy meetings with him, and formally briefed him to institute recovery actions across the federation.
The Retainers
The petition sets out three briefs, and states that the company jointly or severally issued explicit letters of instruction and paid legal fees “running into hundreds of millions of Naira,” as evidenced by its corporate account statements with United Bank for Africa.
On the Delta State brief, it states that on 10 February 2022 he was appointed to sue the Delta State Government in Suit No. FHC/PH/CS/34/2022, resulting in a garnishee order absolute entered on 2 November 2022, after which he handled the appeal in CA/PH/322/2022 and filed a pending notice of appeal before the Supreme Court on the company’s behalf on 18 April 2023.
On the Ebonyi State brief, it states that he was similarly instructed by a joint letter of instruction to prosecute Suit No. FHC/PH/CS/35/2022 against the Government of Ebonyi State, in which “he vigorously and successfully fought for my Company’s legal right to be paid these exact Paris and London Club consultancy fees.”
On the Cross River State brief, it states that he was retained as lead counsel to recover the company’s consultancy fees from the Cross River State Government before the Federal High Court, Abuja, in Suit No. FHC/ABJ/CS/43/18.
“By virtue of this extensive, multi-year attorney-client relationship, Mohammed Ndarani Mohammed, SAN remains an active counsel to my Company at the Supreme Court,” the petition states. “He is in possession of highly confidential, privileged, and proprietary strategic information regarding how our consultancy fees are calculated, structured, and legally defended.”
The Benue Judgment
The petition states that the event giving rise to it occurred in relation to Suit No. FCT/HC/CV/3693/2025, assigned to Honourable Justice Bello Kaw at the Apo High Court, and the subsequent appeals numbered CA/ABJ/CV/1712/2025 and CA/ABJ/CV/1713/2025, now before the Court of Appeal, Abuja Judicial Division.
It states that the company successfully sued the Government of Benue State and the Attorney-General of Benue State under the undefended list procedure to recover its consultancy debt, that the High Court entered judgment in its favour on 17 November 2025 awarding the judgment sum of 7,448,113,025 naira and 42 kobo, and that a garnishee order absolute was subsequently entered against United Bank for Africa Plc on 4 December 2025.
“To our utter dismay, Mohammed Ndarani Mohammed, SAN accepted a brief from the Defendants/Appellants (the Government of Benue State) to represent them against his own client, my Company,” the petition states.
It alleges that he “has launched a relentless, hostile, and multi-front adversarial assault designed to break the judgment, stay an already executed absolute garnishee order, and stop my Company from receiving the fruits of litigation.”
The petition particularises that assault under three heads.
Under hostile applications at the lower court, it states that immediately following the delivery of the judgment he filed an application to set aside the judgment and a separate motion to set aside the judgment, “attempting to erase the court’s decision.”
Under frustration of enforcement, it states that he filed an appeal against the garnishee order nisi, “seeking to paralyze the enforcement processes before the bank funds could be completely moved.”
Under appellate overreach, it states that he proceeded to file and initiate the substantive appeal against the final judgment under Appeal No. CA/ABJ/CV/1712/2025.
The petition then sets out what it calls the inexcusable duplicity of the conduct complained of.
On the identity of the principal witness, it states that in the Ebonyi and Delta matters the senior advocate “relied directly on my own deposition as the primary evidence to win his case,” while “in these new applications and appeals, he is now cross-examining, attacking, and seeking to tear down the exact same testimonies and facts he previously validated.”
On the duplicity of the legal argument, it states that in one judicial division he “argued ferociously that my Company is legally entitled to its Paris Club consultancy fees,” while in the present motions and appellate processes, “using the insider knowledge he gained from our private strategy sessions, he is arguing with equal ferocity that my Company is not entitled to those exact same species of consultancy fees.”
“My Company has never given any consent, waiver, or clearance to the Respondent to switch sides, abandon his loyalty, or represent our debtors,” the petition states.
“His filing of multiple applications to frustrate our judgment places my firm at a massive tactical disadvantage, thoroughly corrupts the principle of a fair trial, and constitutes a textbook case of professional double-dealing.”
Setting out what it describes as the compelling need for intervention, the petition states that as a corporate citizen and user of the Nigerian judicial system the company “relies entirely on the absolute sanctity of the client-lawyer privilege.”
“Mohammed Ndarani Mohammed, SAN is not an ordinary practitioner; he wears the highly prestigious silk of a Senior Advocate of Nigeria,” it states.
“When a bearer of this coveted rank exhibits such a blatant failure of fidelity, loyalty, and confidentiality, it signals to the business community, both local and international, that corporate secrets given to Nigerian lawyers are unsafe. It destroys public confidence in legal administration and sets a toxic, destructive example for younger members of the bar who look up to Senior Advocates as ethical benchmarks.”
“I refuse to watch our proprietary secrets used as weapons against us by the very lawyer we paid to protect them,” the deponent states.
The petition asks that the matter be referred to the Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Committee and the Legal Practitioners Privileges Committee, in order to initiate an immediate and deep investigation into the conduct complained of across both the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory and the Court of Appeal, and to direct an immediate inquiry into the alleged concurrent conflict of interest and breach of confidentiality in the suit and the two appeals.
It asks the bodies to “apply the maximum professional sanctions provided by law, including the recommendation for suspension or the complete stripping of his rank as a Senior Advocate of Nigeria where culpability is established, to serve as a definitive deterrent against future corporate betrayal.”
The deponent states that he makes the declaration in good faith, conscientiously believing it to be true and in accordance with the Oaths Act.
The petition annexes a chronological schedule of documents.
Exhibit A is the joint letter of instruction of 10 February 2022 issued by the company and Andrew Bishopton Limited to the senior advocate’s chambers, tendered to prove the attorney-client relationship and the specific retainership on Paris Club fee recoveries.
Exhibit B is the certified true copy of the garnishee order absolute of 2 November 2022 in the Delta suit, tendered to prove that he actively and successfully prosecuted the Paris Club fee recovery brief as lead counsel.
Exhibit C is the certified true copy of the garnishee order absolute of 2 November 2022 in the Ebonyi suit, tendered to prove that he argued for the validity of the company’s consultancy fees, relying on the deponent’s own deposition.
Exhibit D is the notice of appeal filed before the Supreme Court on 18 April 2023 on the company’s behalf, tendered to prove that he remains active counsel for the petitioner at the apex court, “maintaining an ongoing fiduciary duty.”
Exhibit E comprises United Bank for Africa account statements of the company for various dates between 2022 and 2023, with relevant payments highlighted, tendered as financial evidence of substantial legal fees paid to his firm.
Exhibit F is the certified true copy of the judgment of 17 November 2025 delivered by Honourable Justice Bello Kaw, establishing the judgment debt.
Further enclosures include the certified true copy of the garnishee order absolute of 4 December 2025 against the bank, tendered to prove that the enforcement process was completed and the funds attached before the intervention complained of; copies of the applications and ex parte appellate orders said to have been filed or obtained after November 2025; and the motion on notice and affidavit of facts deposed to by the same deponent on 15 December 2025 in Appeal No. CA/ABJ/CV/1712/2025, tendered to show that a disqualification application for concurrent conflict of interest is officially pending before the Court of Appeal.
The allegations in the petition are those of the petitioner and have not been determined. The senior advocate named has been copied with the petition but has not been heard on it publicly, no finding has been made against him by any body, and the matter is at the stage of a complaint.
A parallel application seeking his disqualification from representing the Government of Benue State, brought on substantially the same facts, is pending before the Court of Appeal in Appeal No. CA/ABJ/CV/1713/2025.
[A MUST HAVE] Evidence Act Demystified With Recent And Contemporary Cases And Materials
Available now for NGN 40,000 at ASC Publications, 10, Boyle Street, Onikan, Lagos. Beside High Court, TBS. Email publications@ayindesanni.com or WhatsApp +2347056667384. Purchase Link: https://paystack.com/buy/evidence-act-complete-annotation
______________________________________________________________________ “Enhance Legal Practice With Authoritative Reports” — Alexander Payne Offers Comprehensive Law Reports, Spanning Over A Century Of Nigerian Jurisprudence
Interested buyers are encouraged to place their orders and enquiries via:
0704 444 4777, 0704 444 4999, 0818 199 9888
Website: www.alexandernigeria.com
