The Directorate has been involved in cases that have greatly impacted on the development of the law in the Nigeria and activities of the State Government.

This involves a wide range of involving Constitutional issues such as  Taxation, Census, Fundamental Human Rights, etc.

Others included the Freedom of Information, Lagos Metroline Project and Export Processing Zone cases.


  • AG LAGOS VS AG FEDERATION CASESthis involved cases instituted by the A. G. Lagos to resolve recondite issues affecting the State development vis a vis the Federal Government of Nigeria.  Some of these cases include:
  • AG. LAGOS VS AG FEDERATION- (2004, Supreme Court) The Supreme held in favour of  Lagos  State that President of the FRN had no right to withhold payment of fund due to Local Government Council.
  • AG LAGOS VS EKO HOTELS LTD (2007, Court of Appeal) Eko Hotels filed an action seeking direction from the Federal High Court seeking for direction as to which tier of the government should the proceed of the Sales Tax be paid to the State having lost the case at the FHC, appealed to the Court of Appeal. The Court of Appeal held in favour of the State, that by virtue the Sales Tax Law 2001, the proceeds of the Sale Tax were to be remitted to Lagos State Government.
  • AG LAGOS VS AG FEDERATION  (2005, Supreme Court)-Lagos state alone was in charge of physical planning and other agencies must conform to its regulations.
    • UAC OF NIGERIA PLC & OTHERS VS AG LAGOS (2010 Court of Appeal) – UAC filed an action challenging the Lagos State Signage and Advertisement Agency  Law 2006 (LASAA Law). The Court of Appeal held in favour of Lagos State Government that the LASAA Law is meant to control and regulate outdoor structures in the State and thereby valid and constitutional as an enactment of the Lagos State House of Assembly, pursuant to its powers under  Section 4(7) of the 1999 Constitution to legislate on residual matters.
    • MAS EVEREST HOTELS LTD & ANOR VS AG LAGOS (2009, High Court) The High Court presided over by Hon. Justice O. H. Oshodi held in favour of the State that the Hotel Occupancy and Restaurant Consumption Law of Lagos State 2009 is constitutional and that  by virtue of  the  1st column of the Concurrent List to 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, the State can make laws relating to the collection of taxes.
    • REGISTERED HOTELIERS NIG. LTD V A. G. OF LAGOS STATE (2012, High Court) This Suit was instituted by a group of hoteliers in Lagos challenging the constitutionality of the Hotel occupancy and consumption Tax Law 2009. A preliminary objection was filed on behalf of the State challenging the jurisdiction of the Federal High Court to adjudicate on a matter relating to the imposition of a State tax. In upholding the Preliminary Objection filed by the State , the Court ruled that it did not have jurisdiction to entertain the matter as the action challenged a State Law and consequently transferred the matter to the State High Court.
    • SUIT NO. SC/340/2010 – AG FEDERATION VS AG LAGOS; SUIT NO SC/462/2010- AG LAGOS VS AG FEDERATION– The Supreme Court on 19th July 2013, unanimously declared that only a State House of Assembly can make laws on tourism or licensing and grading of hotels, restaurants, fast food outlets and other hospitality establishments. Both Suits validate the Lagos State Hotel  Occupancy and Restaurants Consumption Tax  Law (No. 30, Vol. 42, LASG Gazette 23/6/05)  as well as the Hotel Licensing  Law and  Hotel Licensing Amendment Law of Lagos State  (No. 23 Volume 43, LASG Gazette 20/7/10). By these Suits, States can take full charge of tourism regulations in their jurisdictions
    • The Directorate spearheaded the filing of complaints at the Census Tribunal sitting at Abuja, Nigeria, in June 2009 to have the declared figures corrected.  Complaints filed on behalf of each of the 20 Local Government Areas existing as at 2006,   were  concluded  with the Census Tribunal  delivering judgements in each case. The Tribunal returned  favourable judgements in respect of 14 out of 19  Local  Government Areas for  the State.
    • The tribunal also declared null and void the aforementioned 2006 Census Results released by the National Population Commission (NPC), (the 1st Respondent), for most Local Governments under the 2006 Census Results as same were inaccurate, faulty and unsustainable.
  • Fundamental Human Rights “The Hijab case
    • MISS ASIYAT ABDULKAREEM (MINOR) & 2 ORS VS LASG & 2 ORS The Applicant’s case was brought pursuant to the Fundamental Human Rights Enforcement Rules against the State Government, for the continuous denial of the use of  Hijab as  Female Muslim Students in all Educational Institutions  in the State. Judgement dismissing the Suit in favour of the State was delivered on the 17th of October 2014. The Appellants have taken steps to appeal the Judgment of the Court as we keep in view.
  • Fundamental Human Rights
    • CHIEF CHARLES ADU VS AG LAGOS & OTHERS – The Claimant instituted this action by way of Fundamental Human Rights at the Federal High Court claiming N100 Billion for the alleged demolition of more than 1,500 houses by the Nigeria Police Force. This land had originally been allocated to the Nigerian Police by the State Government. The action was dismissed by the Court  by upholding the Preliminary Objection filed by the Defendants on grounds of lack of jurisdiction and the fact that a similar Suit was pending at the Lagos High Court, Badagry Division in Suit No. BD/22M/2008. Final Ruling was delivered on the  27th day of February 2014, dismissing the entire Suit.
  • Freedom of Information Act Cases
    • OTUNBA OYENIYI RAHEEM VS EXECUTIVE CHAIRMAN, AGEGE LOCAL GOVERNMENT & ATTORNEY GENERAL LAGOS – The Claimant filed two separate actions seeking an order of Mandamus under the Freedom of Information Act against the Executive Chairman, of Orile Agege  Local Government. The Court its final rulings delivered on the 31st of January 2014, dismissed the Claimant’s actions on the ground that the Freedom of Information Act did not apply to Defendants and thus did not have jurisdiction to determine the action.
  • Currently the Directorate is involved in the case of the Founder and Head of the Synagogue Church of All Nations, Prophet T. B. Joshua and the alleged infringement of physical planning Laws of the State which resulted in a collapse of  a multi –storey within the premises of the Church killing over 100 persons mainly foreigners.. It is widely referred to as the “ the Synagogue case.”