Legal practitioners have approached the Abuja Division of the Federal High Court, requesting an order to shut down the Nigerian Bar Association Institute of Continuing Legal Education, NBA-ICLE.
This request is among the reliefs sought by the Incorporated Trustees of the Association of Legislative Drafting and Advocacy Practitioners, ALDRAP, in a suit filed against the Incorporated Trustees of the Nigerian Bar Association.
Members of ALDRAP are lawyers who are mainly involved in legislative drafting and advocacy.
The case, marked FHC/ABJ/CS/2758/2025, was filed on December 19, 2025, by ALDRAP’s counsel, Chief Dr Ebosetale David Aighefoh, Esq.
Among other reliefs, ALDRAP is asking the court to declare that the operation of the NBA-ICLE since 2007, without registration with the Corporate Affairs Commission, CAC, is illegal, unlawful, null and void.
The legislative drafting lawyers are also seeking a declaration that NBA-ICLE’s operation as a vocational and professional training institution without a licence from the National Board for Technical and Vocational Education, NBTVE, violates Section 5 of the National Board for Technical and Vocational Education Act.
They further urged the court to declare that the name “NBA Institute of Continuing Legal Education” is misleading, deceptive and unlawful, as the body has not been registered or incorporated under the Companies and Allied Matters Act, 2020.
ALDRAP also wants the court to declare that all certificates issued by NBA-ICLE are legally defective, unenforceable and issued without statutory authority, considering its status as an unregistered and unlicensed entity.
The plaintiffs are asking the court to grant “an order of perpetual injunction directing the defendant (NBA) from further operating, managing or holding out the NBA-ICLE as a Continuing Legal Education or certification body in Nigeria”, as well as “an order directing the defendant to shut down the NBA Institute of Continuing Legal Education forthwith”.
In addition, ALDRAP wants the court to order the NBA to refund N1.2 million, representing N150,000 paid annually for eight years between 2017 and 2024 as Continuing Legal Education provider fees to NBA-ICLE.
The association is also asking the court to direct the NBA to refund all monies “illegally collected from Nigerian lawyers” since 2007 under the Mandatory Continuing Legal Education programme run by NBA-ICLE.
The court was further asked to compel the NBA to provide a full account of all funds collected through NBA-ICLE since 2007, and to nullify all regulatory directives, accreditations and certifications issued by the institute.
ALDRAP outlined six issues for the court to determine, including whether NBA-ICLE, having operated since 2007 without registration or incorporation under the Companies and Allied Matters Act, 2020 and earlier laws, qualifies as a legally recognised juristic entity in Nigeria.
The court is also expected to decide whether NBA-ICLE’s activities as a training and certification body, without a licence from the National Board for Technical and Vocational Education, contravene Section 5 of the National Board for Technical and Vocational Education Act, 1977, as amended in 1993.
Another issue before the court is whether the continued use of the name “NBA Institute of Continuing Legal Education” is deceptive, unlawful and contrary to the Companies and Allied Matters Act, 2020, given that the institute is not incorporated.
The court will also determine whether certificates issued by NBA-ICLE are valid and enforceable, whether the plaintiff is entitled to a refund of monies paid annually for eight years as a “purported Continuing Legal Education Provider”, and whether the NBA is liable to refund all monies collected from Nigerian lawyers since 2007 under the Mandatory Continuing Legal Education programme.
In an affidavit supporting the originating summons, Jesse Williams Amuga, a lawyer and Administrative Secretary of ALDRAP, stated that despite operating for over 17 years, NBA-ICLE is not registered with the CAC under the Companies and Allied Matters Act, 2020.
He noted that under Section 5 of the National Board for Technical and Vocational Education Act, 1977, as amended in 1993, “no institution shall operate or issue vocational certificates without a licence from the National Board for Technical and Vocational Education, NBTVE”.
Amuga stressed that NBA-ICLE has never obtained any licence, approval or accreditation from the NBTVE, adding that he is not aware of any statutory exemption granted to the institute.
“The name ‘NBA Institute of Continuing Legal Education’ is misleading and deceptive as it gives the false impression of being a duly incorporated and statutorily recognized institute. The continued use of the said name violates the Companies and Allied Matters Act, 2020, which mandates registration of entities carrying on institutional and commercial activities,” Amuga stated.
He further told the court that between 2017 and 2024, ALDRAP was required to register annually as a Continuing Legal Education provider with NBA-ICLE and paid N150,000 each year, amounting to N1.2 million over eight years.
Amuga said the payments were made on the belief that NBA-ICLE was a legally constituted and statutorily authorised body.
“The plaintiff would not have made the said payments had it known that the NBA-ICLE was operating illegally and without statutory authority. Since the year 2007 the NBA-ICLE has collected substantial sums of money nationwide under the guise of Mandatory Continuing Legal Education programmes. The said collections were made without lawful authority, regulatory licence or statutory backing.
“Nigerian lawyers have been subjected to sanctions, denial of practice privileges, and other disadvantages for alleged non-compliance with NBA-ICLE directives.
“The actions of the defendant (NBA), through the NBA-ICLE, constitute illegality, regulatory abuse, and unjust enrichment,” he added, warning that unless restrained by the court, the NBA would continue to operate the institute and unlawfully collect funds from lawyers.
Amuga argued that granting the reliefs sought would serve the interest of justice, legality and the rule of law, stressing that the suit was filed in good faith and in the public interest.
