A Federal High Court sitting in Lagos has ordered all parties involved in the ongoing legal dispute over the sale of Lafarge Africa Plc. to Chinese firm Huaxin Cement Ltd. to maintain the status quo pending the outcome of an appeal.

Justice Lewis Allagoa gave the order on Wednesday following a notice of appeal filed by Lafarge Africa Plc. challenging the court’s earlier ruling that dismissed its objection to the court’s jurisdiction.

The suit was instituted by Strategic Consultancy Limited, a Nigerian firm and shareholder in Lafarge Africa, seeking to halt what it described as a
“surreptitious” divestment of Lafarge’s 83.81 per cent majority stake by the Holcim Group—a Swiss multinational and parent company of Lafarge Africa.

Strategic Consultancy is asking the court to determine whether the transaction violates Nigerian corporate and investment laws, including the Companies and Allied Matters Act (CAMA) 2020, the Securities and Exchange Commission Act, and the Nigeria Investment Promotion Commission (NIPC) Act, especially with regard to minority shareholders and foreign entities not registered in Nigeria.

During Wednesday’s proceedings, counsel to Lafarge Africa, Mr. Babatunde Fagbohunlu (SAN), informed the court that an appeal had already been filed against the court’s ruling on jurisdiction. He also disclosed that the records of proceedings had been transmitted to the Court of Appeal, along with an application for a stay of proceedings.

He urged the court to halt further proceedings in the substantive case until the appellate court delivers its ruling on jurisdiction.

Counsel to the second defendant, Mr. Mene Josiah, confirmed that he had filed a similar notice of appeal and supported the call for a stay, arguing it was necessary to prevent prejudice and protect the interests of all parties.

However, counsel to Strategic Consultancy, Dr. D.A. Awosika (SAN), argued that his client had not been served with any notice of appeal. He contended that under Order 11, Rule 4(1)(2) of the Federal High Court Rules, a notice of appeal does not automatically serve as a stay of proceedings.

Awosika noted that the appeal filed by Lafarge Africa was limited to the mode of commencement of the suit and did not touch the core issues of the substantive matter. He urged the court that, if it was inclined to grant a stay, it must also issue an order preserving the subject matter to prevent any action that could compromise the case.

In a brief ruling, Justice Allagoa held that preserving the subject matter was necessary and ordered that all parties maintain the current state of affairs.

“In view of the notice of appeal, arguments by parties on both sides, and because of the need to protect the subject matter in this case, I hereby order that status quo be maintained,” the judge ruled.

The case was adjourned to October 9, 2025.

Lafarge Africa, a major player on the Nigerian Exchange and one of the country’s largest cement manufacturers, secured its dominance through the acquisition of three formerly government-owned cement companies during the 2001 and 2002 privatisation exercises.

The Holcim Group, which owns a controlling stake in Lafarge Africa, had previously informed Nigeria’s Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) of an ongoing internal restructuring exercise.

However, Strategic Consultancy alleges that Holcim’s sale of its 83.81 per cent stake to Huaxin Cement was carried out in secrecy, without offering local shareholders, especially minority investors, the right of first refusal or the opportunity to participate.

The controversy erupted after Strategic Consultancy claimed it only became aware of the transaction when significant steps had already been taken toward its conclusion.

The firm has since accused Lafarge and its majority foreign shareholders of breaching Nigerian laws intended to protect local investors and ensure transparency in transactions involving foreign entities.

On May 15, 2025, during a pre-trial session, Justice Allagoa dismissed Lafarge Africa’s preliminary objection challenging the court’s jurisdiction, clearing the way for the hearing of the substantive suit—a decision now being challenged at the appellate court.