The appellants, Shyngle Wigwe, the late banker’s father and his cousin, Christian Wigwe, have challenged the decision delivered by Justice Olayinka Adeyemi on February 6, 2025.
They argue that the judge erred in declining their request for interim reliefs pending the determination of the substantive suit.
In a notice of appeal dated February 13, the appellants outlined ten grounds for contesting the ruling.
Central to their argument is the claim that the trial judge mistakenly held that the reliefs sought in the interlocutory application were identical or similar to those in the substantive suit.
According to them, the interim reliefs were solely aimed at preserving the estate and ensuring the welfare of the late Wigwe’s minor children pending the resolution of the dispute over his Will.
On the contrary, the final relief was to grant administration for the asset distribution. The Appellants contend that there is a fundamental difference between preservation and inheritance.
Furthermore, the appellants argue that an earlier decision of a magistrate court granting full guardianship of the minor children to their 25-years-old eldest sibling, Otutochi Wigwe, was made without notice to the grandparents.
They clarified that their application was not to overturn the magistrate’s ruling but to include the grandparents as co-guardians to ensure the children’s welfare.