Court fast-tracks Dolphin Steels asset dispute, declines injunction bid

A Court gavel

A Ogun State High Court sitting in Ifo, has ordered an accelerated hearing in a suit bordering on an alleged breach of contract arising from the proposed sale of the assets of Dolphin Steels Limited, a company currently in receivership.

The suit, marked HCF/146/2026, was instituted by Prodigy Finance Limited against the receiver-manager of Dolphin Steels Limited, Mr. Olugbenga Ajala, and Zenith Bank Plc.

In a ruling delivered on Monday, Justice Olugbyega Ogunfowora declined the claimant’s application for an interlocutory injunction but directed that the substantive matter be heard on an accelerated basis.

The court noted that while the claimant had averred that the principal sum under the disputed agreement had been refunded, its claim for damages allegedly arising from a breach of contract remained unresolved and would require full trial.

Emphasising the need to do substantial justice, Justice Ogunfowora abridged the time for the defendants to file their statements of defence to 21 days each, while granting the claimant seven days to respond to any defence filed.

The matter was adjourned to September 7, 2026, for the commencement of pre-trial conference.

The dispute revolves around an agreement for the sale of assets belonging to Dolphin Steels Limited, located in Papalanto, within Ifo Local Government Area of Ogun State.

Prodigy Finance Limited is seeking, among other reliefs, an order of specific performance of the agreement, insisting that the defendants breached the contract.

At a previous sitting on July 23, counsel to the claimant, Oluwatosin Olumakin, had urged the court to restrain the defendants from dealing with or disposing of the assets pending the determination of the suit.

The application was moved in the absence of the defendants. Upon confirmation that hearing notices had been duly served and that the defendants were out of time to respond, the court reserved ruling until August 3.

However, in its decision, the court held that rather than grant the interim relief sought, the interest of justice would be better served by expediting the hearing to allow the substantive issues particularly the claim for damages to be determined on their merits.

Join Our Channels

Taboola Recommendation Widget