Late Briefs, Heavy Damages: What the SERAP Appeal Adjournment Tells Us

The Court of Appeal in Abuja has adjourned the appeals of the Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project (SERAP) and its Deputy Director, Kolawole Oluwadare, against a N101 million defamation judgment to 13 October 2026. The adjournment followed a late appellant's brief by Oluwadare's counsel. It was filed on Thursday and served on the respondents on Friday morning, shortly before the sitting.

The three-member panel, presided over by Justice Danlami Senchi, was reportedly displeased that the court had not been told earlier that the appeal was not ready. It set aside the proceedings in SERAP's appeal (CA/ABJ/CV/1114/2026), directed that both appeals, including Oluwadare's (CA/ABJ/CV/1105/2026), be heard together because they arise from the same judgment, and ordered the respondents to file their briefs by 12 October, with the appellants to file reply briefs before the next hearing. It is a practical reminder that appellate timelines bind counsel, and that candour about readiness is part of the duty owed to the court.

The appeals challenge the 5 May 2026 judgment of Justice Halilu Yusuf of the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja, in suit CV/4547/2024. The claimants, two Department of State Services officials, Sarah John and Gabriel Ogundele, complained about publications on SERAP's website and social media platforms alleging that DSS officials invaded SERAP's Abuja office on 9 September 2024 and harassed its staff.

The trial court held that the claimants had proved the ingredients of defamation and that the defence of justification failed. According to the judge, terms such as "invasion", "forceful entry" and "harassment" were used inaccurately, and the defendants admitted at trial that the officials neither forced their way in nor brandished weapons. The court also held that the claimants did not need to be expressly named in the publications, noted that the publications were not removed after the claimants complained, and dismissed the objection to the competence of the suit. It awarded N100 million in damages and N1 million in costs, ordered a public apology on SERAP's website and X account, in two national dailies and on two television stations, and added 10 per cent annual interest from 5 May until payment.

Three issues are likely to matter on appeal: - Justification: whether the words used can be defended as substantially true. - Identification: whether the claimants could succeed without being expressly named in the publications. - Quantum: whether N100 million is proportionate for reputational harm to individual officers, and whether the apology orders are justified.

Whatever the outcome, the case will shape how advocacy organisations word public allegations against state actors, and how courts balance the right to disseminate information against the reputational rights of public officers. The appeals return to the Court of Appeal on 13 October 2026.

Source: Voice of Nigeria, 10 October 2026.