Justice Alexander Owoeye of the Federal High Court sitting in Lagos has adjourned further hearing in the CBN pensioners’ suit over the implementation of court judgments concerning their retirement benefits to October 15, 2026.
The pensioners are seeking enforcement of previous judgments relating to the harmonisation of their retirement benefits pursuant to a 1997 Federal Government policy.
Key Highlights
- Federal High Court adjourns the CBN pensioners’ suit to October 15, 2026.
- The pensioners are seeking enforcement of earlier judgments on their retirement benefits.
- The pensioners secured judgments at the Federal High Court, Court of Appeal and Supreme Court.
- A separate group of CBN pensioners has applied to join the ongoing proceedings.
- The applicants allege they were excluded from a 15 per cent pension increase.
- They claim the exclusion followed their refusal to accept a disputed settlement agreement presented by the CBN.
- The CBN maintains that it has complied with the previous court judgments.
CBN Pensioners Seek Enforcement of Court Judgments
The plaintiffs contend that the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) has failed to fully implement pension adjustments and arrears arising from previous court judgments.
At the resumed hearing, another group of CBN pensioners filed a motion seeking to be joined as parties to the suit.
The applicants alleged that they had been excluded from a 15 per cent pension increase approved by the Federal Government. They further alleged that the increase was withheld after they declined to accept a disputed out-of-court settlement agreement reportedly presented by the CBN.
The applicants also contended that several of the original litigants had died or become elderly without receiving their full entitlements.
Court Adjourns CBN Pensioners’ Suit
At the hearing, Justice Owoeye informed the parties that he would not entertain any contentious matter and subsequently adjourned the case until October 15, 2026.
The pensioners were represented by a legal team led by Adebayo Oyagbola and E. Oghagbon, while the CBN and other defendants were represented by E. Omoboriowo, Ekuma Chinanso and another counsel.
Pensioners’ Previous Court Victories
The pensioners had secured judgments in their favour at the Federal High Court in 2000, the Court of Appeal in 2006 and the Supreme Court in 2010.
Following what they described as repeated unsuccessful efforts to secure compliance with the court orders, the pensioners commenced enforcement proceedings against the CBN in 2022.
They alleged that the apex bank had failed to comply fully with the judgments. The CBN, however, maintained that it had complied with the judgments and, among other issues, challenged the locus standi of the pensioners to institute the enforcement proceedings.
The apex bank subsequently filed a preliminary objection to the enforcement proceedings.
CBN Pensioners’ Contempt Proceedings
During the enforcement proceedings, the court issued subpoenas directing the CBN to produce documents relating to pension payments and reviews.
The pensioners alleged that the CBN failed to comply with the subpoenas, following which the court made contempt orders against the bank. The CBN appealed against the proceedings and the contempt orders.
While the appeal was pending before the Court of Appeal, the CBN subsequently presented what was described as a “Settlement Agreement” to the pensioners.
According to the group seeking to join the proceedings, the agreement required pensioners to acknowledge the CBN’s alleged compliance with the earlier judgments. The applicants further alleged that pensioners who declined to accept the agreement were excluded from a subsequent 15 per cent pension increase.
Read Also
Pensioners Challenge Settlement Agreement
The matter was eventually remitted to the Federal High Court for consideration and determination of the CBN’s preliminary objection. At that stage, the separate group of pensioners applied to be joined in the proceedings.
Among other reliefs, the applicants are asking the court to determine whether the CBN’s actions in issuing and administering the disputed settlement agreement were lawful and consistent with the subsisting judgments and the court’s enforcement jurisdiction.
They are also asking the court to determine the legality of requiring pensioners to acknowledge compliance with the earlier judgments as a condition for benefiting from subsequent pension reviews.
The applicants are further challenging the alleged exclusion of pensioners who declined to make such an acknowledgment from the reviews.
The case is expected to return before Justice Owoeye on October 15, 2026.
For updates, follow The Trumpet on X.
