We are a top law firm known for delivering consistently high-quality legal services across nearly every major area of law.
Who We Are
Ebun-Olu Adegboruwa, SAN & Co. is a powerhouse of professional legal experts and result-oriented workforce that are tailored to deliver valuable legal solutions across all industries.
Meet the Team
Our firm is renowned for combining deep legal expertise with broader insights to handle complex cases, disputes, and regulatory challenges.
Practice Areas
Ours is "the absolute go to firm" for anything complex and time sensitive, a reputation born of deep bench strength and a unified culture of excellence.
Go To Pro Bono
Our Principal's corner is filled with educative and interesting knowledge-based sections that grant you access to his interviews, public lectures, articles while keeping you informed of the law and your legal right.
ExploreEbun-Olu Adegboruwa, SAN & Company is a dynamic Law firm of astute legal practitioners experienced in different fields of the Nigerian legal system.
Our firm is recognized for delivering forward thinking legal counsel, combining modern approaches with local insight to help clients seize business opportunities and navigate change with confidence. Sector expertise is central to our success.
Our lawyers possess deep knowledge of the industries in which our clients operate, enabling us to provide comprehensive advice grounded in real world understanding. For our clients, this translates into service enriched with an added dimension of value.
Our firm provides proactive, expert guidance on rights, responsibilities, and liabilities, helping you navigate contracts, reduce risks, and maintain compliance. Whether you’re growing an SME, safeguarding intellectual property, or resolving disputes, our tailored counsels deliver the clarity and confidence needed to make sound legal decisions.
We are renowned for providing clients with valuable solutions to intricate business and legal issues across various areas covering sectors such as banking & finance, intellectual property, tax, real estate, foreign investment, labour law, mergers and acquisitions etc...
We are a top law firm known for delivering consistently high-quality legal services across nearly every major area of law.
![]() |
Learned Expression
23rd September, 2026 Oraka vs Oraka and the impact of duress (2)Whether Agreement Made Under Duress is Binding and Enforceable: An agreement entered into under duress is not binding and enforceable, it is voidable. In this case, aside from the undertaking extracted from the appellant on 18 th April 2011, while the criminal charge was pending, there was no prior indication by either party that they intended to enter into a memorandum of undertaking in relation to the division of the properties. It is apparent that but for the undertaking tied to the withdrawal of the criminal charge, the issue of property division via the MOUs would not have arisen at that time. Thus, though the appellant had a period of twelve days between the undertaking and the MOU 1, the criminal charge against the appellant in which the 1st respondent was the nominal complainant remained pending until 7th October 2011 when it was withdrawn by the 1st respondent after the MOUs had been entered into. That constituted continuing evidence of duress. The appellant was, throughout that period, exposed to the apprehension and anxiety naturally associated with a subsisting criminal charge. Although he was advised by learned counsel and had correspondences written on his behalf, the overarching coercive environment remained and his decisions were influenced by it. In the circumstances, the trial court was right in holding that MOU 1 was tainted by duress. That duress persisted at the time MOU 2 was executed. The linkage of the MOUs to the withdrawal of the pending criminal charge rendered the voluntariness of the appellant’s consent doubtful. The Court of Appeal therefore erred in treating the duress as having dissipated merely by the passage of time without the extinguishment of the underlying coercive factor. Therefore, the MOUs were executed under continuing duress and are voidable at the instance of the appellant. The MOU 1 and MOU 2 are void for being executed under duress. Consequently, any agreement, obligation, or purported disposition of rights arising from the said MOUs is also void. When Court of Appeal Can Make Orders Not Sought on Appeal: Pursuant to section 15 of the Court of Appeal Act, once the court undertakes re-evaluation of evidence, it is empowered to assume full jurisdiction over the proceedings and to make such orders as are necessary for determining the real issues in controversy. In this case, having reconsidered the evidence, the Court of Appeal found it necessary, in the interest of justice, to grant orders flowing from its findings and sought at the trial court. Though the specific reliefs were not the direct basis of the cross-appeal, it is evident from the notice of appeal to the Court of Appeal that the complaint extended to the entire decision of the trial court on the ownership of the properties. The order made by the Court of Appeal was therefore in consequence of the court’s findings on the evidence on record. It would not have served the interest of justice for the Court of Appeal, after re-evaluation, to leave its conclusions without the necessary consequential orders. In this case, the Court of Appeal acted within its powers in granting some of the reliefs sought by the 1 st respondent in her counter-claim. The Power of Court to Make Consequential Order: A court must base its decision on the issues submitted by the parties. Nevertheless, a court retains the inherent jurisdiction to make consequential orders to give effect to its judgment. It is also irrelevant that the particular order was not specifically asked for, provided that it flows naturally from the decision reached and did not confer unearned advantage. In this case, the Court of Appeal acted within its powers in granting some of the reliefs sought by the 1 st respondent in her counter-claim. When Supreme Court will not Interfere with Concurrent Findings of facts by Lower Courts: The Supreme Court will not interfere with the concurrent findings of facts by lower courts where they are not shown to be perverse and no exceptional circumstance has been established to warrant the court’s intervention. In this case, the trial court, after evaluating the evidence, found that the MOUs were executed on the dates appearing on their faces, and the Court of Appeal upheld that finding. The trial court also made a specific finding that the deed of assignment in respect of two detached houses at Lekki-Epe Expressway, Lekki Scheme 1, Lagos State was issued in the name of Ashley Okara, and that finding was also upheld by the Court of Appeal. The appellant did not show that the concurrent findings are perverse. So, the Supreme Court will not interfere with the findings. The Attitude of Court to Academic Matters: The court does not engage in academic or hypothetical inquiries. CONCLUSION Generally, duress is a legal concept that arises when a person is compelled to enter into a transaction or agreement through unlawful threats, force, or undue pressure. The law requires that agreements be entered into voluntarily, with the free consent of all parties. Where consent is obtained through duress, the validity of the agreement is affected. In our clime however, law enforcement agencies apply this crude tactic due to lack of capacity to undertake forensic investigations, for lack of adequate funding, amongst other factors. In frustration, the aggression is wrongly transferred to the suspect, in employing force, coercion and at times brute violence, to extract the so-called confessional statements. In employing duress, state actors invariably admit to the failure of due process and their preference for the use of actual or threatened violence, unlawful confinement, economic pressure, or other forms of coercion, that deprive a person of the freedom to make an independent decision. In most cases, the pressure is significant enough to overcome the person’s free will. The principal effects of duress include: Voidable Agreements: A contract entered into under duress is generally not automatically void but voidable at the option of the injured party. The victim may choose to affirm or rescind the agreement once the duress has ceased. Right to Rescind the Contract: The affected party may apply to a court to set aside the transaction and restore both parties to their original positions, provided this can be done fairly. This was the case in Oraka v Oraka, where the aggrieved party utilized his right to challenge the agreements in court and to void them. Loss of Genuine Consent: Since consent is not freely given, one of the essential elements required for a valid contract is absent. Parties must be ad idem for any agreement to be valid and binding. Possible Award of Damages: In some cases, the injured party may recover damages if the duress caused financial loss or other harm. Protection of Public Policy: Courts discourage coercion and uphold the principle that contracts should result from voluntary agreement rather than intimidation or unlawful pressure. In essence, duress undermines the foundation of contractual relationships by destroying the element of free consent. The law therefore provides remedies to protect parties who have been forced into agreements against their will. To ensure the enforceability of any transaction or agreement, all parties must enter into it voluntarily and without unlawful pressure. MAKING IT WORK There is a need to address the issue of duress headlong in order to stem the ugly tide. The following suggestions, though not exhaustive, can provide some practical guidelines on how to stop the incidences of duress. Promote Legal Awareness: Educate individuals and businesses about their contractual rights and the legal consequences of coercion. From experience, the aggressor takes undue advantage of the victim due to ignorance of their rights under the law. Encourage Independent Legal Advice: Parties should seek legal counsel before signing important contracts, especially where significant financial or property interests are involved. It is better to cancel a proposed contract than have it annulled upon execution. Ensure Voluntary Consent: Agreements should be signed freely, without threats, intimidation, or undue pressure. Adequate time should be given for parties to review the terms. Document the Negotiation Process: Keeping written records, emails, and witness statements can help prove that negotiations were conducted fairly and voluntarily. As is presently the case in criminal investigation, video and photographic evidence should be deployed. Strengthen Law Enforcement: Authorities should promptly investigate and prosecute acts of intimidation, extortion, or violence used to force people into agreements. Police officers whose cases are confirmed to arise from torture or any other form of duress should not just lose their cases but also pay for their malady. Adopt Clear Organizational Policies: Businesses and institutions should establish policies prohibiting coercive practices in negotiations and contracting, such that these provisions are embedded into the agreement. Provide Effective Dispute Resolution Mechanisms: Access to mediation, arbitration, and the courts allows parties to resolve disputes without resorting to threats or force. Encourage Ethical Business Practices: Organizations should promote honesty, transparency, and fairness in all commercial dealings. These cases have been highlighted for the attention of the law enforcement agencies to be more conscious of the rights of citizens in order to avoid the pitfalls of criminal prosecution. |
![]() |
30th April, 2026 Constitution amendment: What NASS has done is mere tokenism -AdegboruwaA member of the Lagos Judicial Panel on Police Brutality during the #EndSARS protest, rights activist and Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), Mr Ebun-Olu Adegboruwa speaks to DARE ADEKANMBI on the ongoing constitution amendment by the National Assembly, the presidential materials on offer and 2023 elections. The National Assembly members accepted some robust proposals concerning ongoing efforts at amending the 1999 Constitution. Are you happy about some of the accepted recommendations? I am not [happy] in any way at all. Why? What the National Assembly has done is mere tokenism. It is just scratching the surface of the real issues plaguing our country. We are not running a federation. It is unitary system of government that we have currently. It is not correct to just be handing over bits and pieces to the states, regions and local government councils, as if there is no equality of status. Power should go down to the owners, that is, the states, local government and the regions. The Federal Government has no business holding on to all the issues and items that bring money to the federation. The Federal Government should just be an administrative centre. So, all the things they voted upon have no relevance to our demand for true federalism. The APC, when it was canvassing for votes in 2015, promised devolution of powers and what we understood by that is that there will be resource control first. The regions that have the natural resources within their domains will be allowed considerable freedom. Osun and Zamfara states should be able to mine their gold; Ondo should be able to mine its oil and Oyo State should be allowed to take care of its cocoa, gold and everything that is there. The same thing should apply to the North where the northerners should be allowed the control of their natural resources and they pay royalty to the centre. None of these things has been tackled at all by the National Assembly. All this window-dressing of reforms does not make any impact on our demand for true federalism. Our lawmakers should summon the courage to address the yearnings of Nigerians so that the country can move forward. There reason there is corruption is that there is too much money at the federal level for which nothing is being done, no projects are being executed. Give the money to the owners so that people can take their destinies into their own hands and move the country forward. What the National Assembly is doing is not acceptable at all. Why can't we have state police? Who is scared? Look at the success of Amotekun in the South-West. Who is scared? But some Nigerians have applauded the removal of VAT from Exclusive List to the Concurrent List for states to also have power over this tax? That is why I called it tokenism. VAT is a value added tax, a product of certain events in terms of sales, commerce and consumption. Those are just paltry things. The main resource of the country is what each region has as an advantage. There is no reason for the Federal Government to be sitting on that. That is the core issue behind the clamour for devolution of power, resource control and independence for the states. What is the Fedral Government doing by legislating central admission to schools and education of children when our youths are suffering, no universities to admit them. Lawyers graduate from universities and can't go to law school because there is a central system of controlling those who get admission into law school. For God's sake, in 21 century? Why can't Rivers State build its own law school and all its citizens who graduate from its own university can go there and be trained? Why can't Lagos, Kano and other states have their own law schools? That is what is happening in the United States, United Kingdom and other jurisdictions. Why will children be writing a common examination called UTME in order to secure admission to universities and they are frustrating them every day. They said some states are educationally disadvantaged and somebody who passes on merit is asked to be on the waiting line for somebody who did not pass. In what sane society do you see such a thing? Do you see this tokenistic attempt, to use your phraseology, as a prelude to the clamour for restructuring because electricity, railway and other items are now on the Concurrent List? But this is not what the government promised us. I want to emphasise that when APC was canvassing for votes in order to displace the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP), APC entered into a social contract with Nigerians for total devolution of powers by amending the constitution or writing a new constitution. In demonstration of that, the party set up a committee headed by the Kaduna State governor, Nasir el-Rufai on restructuring. Where is the report? Why are they scratching the surface? They know what Nigerians want which is restructuring and which was why we voted them into power. Why is APC chickening out now? That is the point I am making. There is no need for us to be dancing around and be doing a prelude. Let's go into the main action and let Nigeria move forward. Do you see the current National Assembly summoning the courage to go the whole hog of bringing about the fundamental changes required in the law for the good governance of the country? It is not about whether they have the courage, but whether they can continue like this for another time. There are so many of these people in the parliament in Abuja who can no longer go to their constituencies either for reason of insurgency, kidnapping or the poverty that has enveloped their constituencies. Many of them are sojourners in Abuja who are unable to relate with the people who voted for them. How long can they continue to pretend? This is what is at the core of the crisis in the country. No employment, mass poverty, no infrastructure and it is all because of corruption. The Federal Government is sitting on all the goldmine that makes this country Nigeria and somebody will sit in Abuja and be doing portfolio oil well and be selling oil through telephone. This is what is making Nigeria not to go forward. That is why we are saying we can't be scratching this thing on the surface and be giving us tokens. We want to go to the meat of the matter. Let there be true federalism or those who make peaceful change impossible will make violent change inevitable. This system will consume the parliamentarians themselves if they don't take the courage to do the needful. It is not about conducting elections in 2023. We must define the basis of our federalism. We must address the fundamental issue of resource management, political power. Let's go back to the Uwais Panel report. Let's go back to the 2014 National Conference report. Let's go back to the el-Rufai report. Why are they hiding these things? It is wickedness on the part of our leaders. If they don't summon the courage to do the needful, many of them will be swallowed over time by the crisis that they have imposed on the rest of us. Another general election is 11 months away. Do you see any fundamental change in the way Nigerians will vote? I think that what we have advocated is that the constitution recognizes zoning in Section 14 of the constitution which talks about not allowing a particular ethnic group or a particular set of people to be in dominance. You saw how it played out recently when the Minister of Education was asked at a press conference the reason for sustaining the cut off mark in Unity Schools and not allow merit to its place in admission to Unity Schools that belong to the federation. He said it is because of federal character which is being implemented to ensure that states which don't have enough students are allowed to be lifted above the rest. So, federal character is being implemented in favour of those particular states. Then, federal character should be implemented for political power. Otherwise, there is injustice. You can't be implementing the constitution to favour you in the areas where you have disadvantage and then you refuse to implement it in the areas where others have and want advantage. It will not be fair. It will not be fair if the region that has produced the president from 2015 to 2023 to still be contesting for the presidency. This will add to the crisis in the land. If you agree on a particular position for a particular region at a particular time, then you should let it cut across. So, the first thing is that there must be zoning. The president in 2023 should come from the Southern part of the country, whether it is South-East, South-South or South-West. That will be when we will know we are running a federation. If for any reason, either due to population or rigging or any misappropriation of political power, the presidency goes back to the same region where President Muhammadu Buhari comes from, then we will know there is no country. Democracy and election are numbers game. If the North votes more than we do in the South, then it means they will be right to have it. Then, education should also be by merit. If children sit for an examination and the only people that pass are from the South, then let them get admitted into all the schools in the country. Admission should also be by merit. If we want to use merit, let it be general. But they can't be implanting federal character to their own advantage and then sit on it when it comes to the turn of others. That is what I am saying. If you have population as an advantage and you want to be using it, then you must concede to those who have intellect as well so that when you take the benefit, you also take your own burden. Do you foresee a likely shift in paradigm in the way Southerners will vote in 2023 because the Northerners seem to have this huge political consciousness at election and this appears absent in the South? This is the reason we are Nigeria. It is possible for a particular section to have a consciousness in a particular area as their own advantage, just the same way in the South, here there is consciousness for education. Every average Southerner wants to go to school. It is possible that the average person in the North wants to go to the army or wants to go and collect PVC. Everybody has his own advantage. That is why we came together to say unity in progress. So, you can't use your consciousness for political power to dominate others who have consciousness for other things and you are not allowing them to use their consciousness to their advantage. So, it makes no sense to say because the Northerners have political consciousness, that puts them at an advantage to be ruling us forever. Other people have consciousness for other things and that consciousness has not enabled them to dominate those who don't have the consciousness. So, we are asking for a level-playing field. We can't claim that because of those who have consciousness to collect PVC to go and vote, others should wait forever. A number of people have been offering themselves as presidential materials, crisscrossing the country on consultations. When you look at those on the field now, any hope of a messiah emerging from among them? I honestly think our focus should be the system that will produce these people because once the system is proper, the constitution is properly drafted and the institutions are strengthened, it will be immaterial who gets to power. Everything [Donald] Trump did to frustrate the American election, the institutions of the country overpowered him because the system had been arranged to function at its optimal level. So, whether the individuals who are indicating to be president now have the capacity and understanding is really a function of the system that will produce them. My focus won't be on the individuals, but to ensure we structure our system in such a way that whoever emerges will follow the trend that Nigerians have outlined for their own prosperity. That is my own understanding. Once the system is right, whosever comes up, must fall in line. So, we need to amend the constitution properly in such a way that it will guarantee common prosperity for the common good of the peoples of Nigeria, ensure that the rule of impunity is arrested, see that the fundamental rights of people are guaranteed, ensure there is press freedom and liberty for the courts. Once these things are taken care of, an individual will not be able to manipulate us. In other words, you don't see age as a factor? Well, age is a factor, no doubt, and I believe so. For instance, President Buhari himself admitted that much of his handicap came by reason of his age. So, given our medical system and our environment, the elderly are at disadvantage in Nigeria unlike in the United States where you see 70 years old people still ruling in power because their system functions very well. Life expectancy is higher and the environment is conducive to be able to allow our healthcare system to take care of the ageing people. It is not the same in Nigeria. So, in that regard, I believe age is also important. This particular government brought the idea not-too-young to rule in encouraging younger people to get to power. So, it should stick to its own policy. |
We can help you make critical decisions using our legal framework and valuable experience in legal matters. A one-on-one guidance with our experts will highlight your key issues, common initiatives and help you achieve your mission-critical priorities.
Lagos
Lekki Law Center
'Kogun Chambers, Jesus Arena'
Ebun-Olu Adegboruwa SAN & Co.,
Plot 1, Ebun-Olu Adegboruwa Lane
Itedo/Freedom Way,
Lekki Phase 1,
Lagos, Nigeria.
08033016673, 08033246500, 08100000758
info@adegboruwalaw.com, adegboruwalaw@yahoo.com
Abuja
Abuja Law Center
No. 12 Winston Churchill Street,
Asokoro,
FCT, Abuja,
Nigeria.
08033016673, 08033246500, 08100000759
info@adegboruwalaw.com, adegboruwalaw@yahoo.com
Copyright © All rights reserved | MAIL

