{"id":92766,"date":"2026-10-19T10:35:16","date_gmt":"2026-10-19T10:35:16","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/dnllegalandstyle.com\/dnl\/?p=92766"},"modified":"2026-10-19T10:35:16","modified_gmt":"2026-10-19T10:35:16","slug":"lpdc-appeal-chief-olanipekun-san-seeks-urgent-amendment-to-the-lpa-raises-questions-about-court-of-appeal-judges-membership-of-lpdc-panel","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/dnllegalandstyle.com\/dnl\/lpdc-appeal-chief-olanipekun-san-seeks-urgent-amendment-to-the-lpa-raises-questions-about-court-of-appeal-judges-membership-of-lpdc-panel\/","title":{"rendered":"LPDC APPEAL: Chief Olanipekun SAN Seeks Urgent Amendment to the LPA, Raises Questions About Court of Appeal Judges Membership of LPDC Panel"},"content":{"rendered":"

 <\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Chief Wole Olanipekun, SAN, has called for an amendment to the Legal Practitioners Act to establish a clear appellate route for lawyers dissatisfied with decisions of the Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Committee (LPDC).<\/p>\n

Olanipekun said legislative intervention had become necessary following the Supreme Court\u2019s\u00a0<\/a>pronouncements on its jurisdiction to entertain appeals arising directly from decisions of the disciplinary body.<\/p>\n

He raised the issue in an address delivered on behalf of the Body of Senior Advocates of Nigeria (BOSAN) during the commencement of the 2026 New Legal Year and the swearing-in of 68 new Senior Advocates of Nigeria in Abuja.<\/p>\n

The Legal juggernaut discussed the Supreme Court\u2019s decision in Ben Mene-Ejegi, Esq. v. Nigerian Bar Association & Anor.<\/em>, Appeal No. SC\/481\/2018, delivered on 26 June 2026.<\/p>\n

According to him, the Supreme Court, sitting as a full court<\/span>, held that it lacked jurisdiction to entertain a direct appeal from a decision or direction of the <\/span>LPDC, <\/span>emphasising the constitutionally prescribed appellate route through the Court of Appeal.<\/span><\/p>\n

Chief Olanipekun SAN also referred to the controversy surrounding Osuji v. LPDC<\/em> (2025) 17 NWLR (Pt. 2014) 317, which had raised questions about the jurisdictional framework governing disciplinary proceedings against legal practitioners. He urged the National Assembly to amend the Legal Practitioners Act to expressly provide for appeals to the Court of Appeal from decisions of the LPDC. He argued that the law should clearly identify the appropriate appellate forum so that legal practitioners are not left in uncertainty when seeking to challenge disciplinary decisions.<\/p>\n

The proposed amendment, however, should not be limited to creating an appellate route. Chief Olanipekun SAN argued that lawmakers must also consider the composition of the LPDC and the institutional implications of transferring appellate responsibility to the Court of Appeal. He drew attention to section 11(2)(b) of the Legal Practitioners Act, which provides for two Justices of the Court of Appeal to sit as members of the LPDC. He questioned the propriety of a system in which the Court of Appeal would exercise appellate jurisdiction over decisions made by a disciplinary body that includes members drawn from the same court. He contrasted this arrangement with section 11(2)(a) of the Act, which addresses the exclusion of the Chief Justice of Nigeria and Justices of the Supreme Court from membership or chairmanship of the LPDC. He argued that any legislative solution must take these institutional safeguards into account.<\/p>\n

Chief Olanipekun praised the Supreme Court for revisiting its earlier decision in Okike v. <\/em>LPDC<\/em> (2005) 3\u20134 SC 49 and expressly overruling it insofar as it recognised and exercised appellate jurisdiction over LPDC decisions. He described the willingness of the apex court to correct its earlier position as an important demonstration of judicial courage and intellectual honesty. However, he warned that resolving the jurisdictional question without providing a workable appellate mechanism could leave a serious gap in the protection of legal practitioners affected by disciplinary decisions.<\/div>\n
<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

  Chief Wole Olanipekun, SAN, has called for an amendment to the Legal Practitioners Act to establish a clear appellate route for lawyers dissatisfied with decisions of the Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Committee (LPDC). Olanipekun said legislative intervention had become necessary following the Supreme Court\u2019s\u00a0pronouncements on its jurisdiction to entertain appeals arising directly from decisions of […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":14,"featured_media":86884,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"om_disable_all_campaigns":false,"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_feature_clip_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":true,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2},"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false},"categories":[5],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-92766","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-news"],"aioseo_notices":[],"aioseo_head":"\n\t\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t