By Ikechukwu Nnochiri

ABUJA– The Federal High Court sitting in Abuja, on Monday, slated June 3 to hear a dispute between the Federal Government and a firm engaged to managed the platform deployed for citizenship and marriage registrations.

Justice Emeka Nwite okayed the matter for hearing after he warned the Ministry of Interior from taking any action that is capable of jeopardizing the subject matter of the suit that was brought before it by the plaintiff, Anchor Dataware Solutions Limited.

He ordered the parties to maintain the status quo, pending the resolution of the contractual dispute.

Cited as defendants in the suit marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/770/2025 are the Ministry of Interior, the Attorney General of the Federation, and the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

The firm alleged wrongful termination of its contract to manage and maintain the e-Citibiz platform—a system used for automating expatriate quotas, business permits, citizenship processes, and marriage registrations.

It is among other reliefs, seeking a declaration that the Public-Private Partnership (PPP) agreement the Ministry of Interior entered with it on behalf of FG, remained valid and binding.

The plaintiff further wants the court to declare that its disengagement via a letter dated April 15, 2025, was unlawful and a breach of the terms of the contract.

More so, it is praying the court to issue an injunction to restrain the Ministry of Interior from appointing another service provider in its stead without following the three-month termination notice procedure stipulated in clause 13.1 of the agreement.

The plaintiff equally prayed the court to award to it, ₦20million in damages.

When the case was called up on Monday, counsel for the plaintiff, Mr. A.O. Amagwula, and that of the defendants, Mr. Abiola Olawola, announced their appearances.

Olawola said he had earlier filed a preliminary objection to challenge the competence of the suit and the jurisdiction of the court to hear the matter.

However, he disclosed that the plaintiffs, upon the receipt of the process, filed a counter-affidavit to dismiss it.

Consequently, the defence counsel prayed for a short adjournment to enable him to file his response to the counter-affidavit.

Even though counsel to the plaintiff do not oppose the adjournment request, he urged the court to formally order the parties to maintain the status quo to protect the subject matter of the litigation.

Delivering his ruling, Justice Nwite stressed that once a matter is before a court, justice required that all the parties must refrain from actions that could affect the substance of the case.

“This is a court of record. If a matter is before the court, justice demands that, without any pronouncement, parties must stay action on all issues related to the case pending the hearing of the substantive suit,” the judge ruled.

On his part, FG’s lawyer assured the court that no action would be taken, pending the determination of case.