An appeal has been filed to challenge a ruling by the Lagos State High Court in the ongoing legal dispute over the estate of the late former Group Managing Director and Chief Executive Officer of Access Bank, Herbert Wigwe.

The appellants, Pastor Shyngle Wigwe (the late banker’s father) and Christian Wigwe (his cousin) are contesting the decision made on February 6, 2025, by Justice Olayinka Adeyemi.

They argued that the trial judge erred in refusing their request for interim relief pending the resolution of the substantive suit.

In a notice of appeal dated February 13, 2025, the appellants pointed out 10 grounds for contesting the ruling.

They argued that the trial judge wrongly held that the reliefs sought in the interlocutory application were identical or similar to those in the main suit.

The appellants maintained that the interim reliefs were solely intended to preserve the estate and ensure the welfare of the late Wigwe’s minor children until the dispute over his will is settled.

In contrast, the final relief sought was to grant administration for the distribution of the assets.

They argued that there is a crucial difference between preservation and inheritance.

The appellants further claimed that:

“The refusal to grant preservative reliefs has left the estate vulnerable to potential dissipation before a final decision is made.

“The trial court failed to appoint interim administrators, despite acknowledging the dispute over the validity of the Will, thus violating Section 24(1) of the Administration of Estates Law of Lagos State, 1959, which allows the appointment of administrators in such cases.

“The failure to appoint interim guardians for the deceased’s minor children deprived the grandparents of the opportunity to temporarily participate in their care and welfare.”

Additionally, the appellants argued that a previous decision by a magistrates’ court, which granted full guardianship of the minor children to their eldest sibling, Otutochi Wigwe, 25, was made without notice to the grandparents.

They clarified that their application was not to overturn the magistrates’ decision, but to ensure the grandparents are included as co-guardians to support the children’s well-being.