The Lagos State High Court, sitting in Igbosere, has restrained further demolition, excavation and construction on a disputed property at 168 Broad Street, Lagos Island.Justice Yetunde Adesanya issued the pre-emptive order following an application by Dr Abimbola Adebowale, who alleged that the property was partly demolished before Taiwo Yusuf allegedly took possession and began preparations to develop the premises.The dispute followed a 48-hour enforcement notice issued by the Lagos Island Local Government on August 6, 2026, directing occupants of the property to vacate and remove containers and other structures it described as illegal.The notice, signed by A. O. Ojora on behalf of the council engineer, warned that failure to comply within 48 hours would attract appropriate enforcement action under applicable laws and regulations.According to Adebowale, the situation escalated after part of the property was demolished and Yusuf allegedly took possession following the local government’s intervention.She further alleged that the defendants forcefully ejected tenants without notice, demolished part of the structure at night and barricaded the premises with aluminium zinc in preparation for further demolition and construction.In an 11-paragraph affidavit filed in support of the application, a staff member of United Capital Trustee Limited, Babatunde Bello, said the company had managed the property since 2016 without disturbance until the alleged encroachment.Bello stated that Adebowale appointed United Capital Trustee Limited as trustee of her properties through a Deed of Trust dated August 8, 2026.He alleged that on August 19, 2026, the defendants forcibly evicted tenants from the premises without prior notice or Adebowale’s consent before partly demolishing the building.The affidavit further stated that the defendants subsequently barricaded the property with aluminium zinc, allegedly to facilitate the complete demolition of the remaining structure and commencement of construction.Related NewsLagos ranks fourth for luxury two-bedroom rentsLagos man beaten to death weeks before weddingWidow, police families protest demolition of houses in SokotoAdebowale, through her lawyer, Waheed Isiaka of KISAB Solicitors & Attorneys, urged the court to preserve the property pending completion of the pre-action protocol.She relied on Orders 1 and 2 of Practice Direction No. 2 of 2019, which empower the court to grant pre-emptive remedies where necessary in the interest of justice or to prevent irreparable damage or serious mischief.Ruling on the application, Justice Adesanya held that Adebowale had met the conditions for the grant of the pre-emptive remedy.The judge said an applicant must show that failure to grant the order could result in irreparable damage or serious mischief, attach a Memorandum of Claim, establish an urgent need to preserve the subject matter and explain why the pre-action protocol had not been fully complied with.According to the court, the applicant met the requirements through the averments in her affidavits, the Memorandum of Claim and exhibits placed before the court.Justice Adesanya consequently restrained Yusuf, the unidentified defendants, their privies, agents and proxies from completely demolishing, dissipating, excavating or constructing on the disputed property pending full compliance with the pre-action protocol.The judge, however, held that the order was temporary and conditional.She directed the applicant to fully comply with the pre-action protocol within the timelines prescribed by the High Court of Lagos State (Civil Procedure) Rules 2019 and Practice Direction No. 2 of 2019.Justice Adesanya warned that failure to comply within the stipulated period would cause the protective order to lapse. Justice Yetunde Adesanya issued the pre-emptive order following an application by Dr Abimbola Adebowale, who alleged that the property was partly demolished before Taiwo Yusuf allegedly took possession and began preparations to develop the premises.The dispute followed a 48-hour enforcement notice issued by the Lagos Island Local Government on August 6, 2026, directing occupants of the property to vacate and remove containers and other structures it described as illegal.The notice, signed by A. O. Ojora on behalf of the council engineer, warned that failure to comply within 48 hours would attract appropriate enforcement action under applicable laws and regulations.According to Adebowale, the situation escalated after part of the property was demolished and Yusuf allegedly took possession following the local government’s intervention.She further alleged that the defendants forcefully ejected tenants without notice, demolished part of the structure at night and barricaded the premises with aluminium zinc in preparation for further demolition and construction.In an 11-paragraph affidavit filed in support of the application, a staff member of United Capital Trustee Limited, Babatunde Bello, said the company had managed the property since 2016 without disturbance until the alleged encroachment.Bello stated that Adebowale appointed United Capital Trustee Limited as trustee of her properties through a Deed of Trust dated August 8, 2026.He alleged that on August 19, 2026, the defendants forcibly evicted tenants from the premises without prior notice or Adebowale’s consent before partly demolishing the building.The affidavit further stated that the defendants subsequently barricaded the property with aluminium zinc, allegedly to facilitate the complete demolition of the remaining structure and commencement of construction.Related NewsLagos ranks fourth for luxury two-bedroom rentsLagos man beaten to death weeks before weddingWidow, police families protest demolition of houses in SokotoAdebowale, through her lawyer, Waheed Isiaka of KISAB Solicitors & Attorneys, urged the court to preserve the property pending completion of the pre-action protocol.She relied on Orders 1 and 2 of Practice Direction No. 2 of 2019, which empower the court to grant pre-emptive remedies where necessary in the interest of justice or to prevent irreparable damage or serious mischief.Ruling on the application, Justice Adesanya held that Adebowale had met the conditions for the grant of the pre-emptive remedy.The judge said an applicant must show that failure to grant the order could result in irreparable damage or serious mischief, attach a Memorandum of Claim, establish an urgent need to preserve the subject matter and explain why the pre-action protocol had not been fully complied with.According to the court, the applicant met the requirements through the averments in her affidavits, the Memorandum of Claim and exhibits placed before the court.Justice Adesanya consequently restrained Yusuf, the unidentified defendants, their privies, agents and proxies from completely demolishing, dissipating, excavating or constructing on the disputed property pending full compliance with the pre-action protocol.The judge, however, held that the order was temporary and conditional.She directed the applicant to fully comply with the pre-action protocol within the timelines prescribed by the High Court of Lagos State (Civil Procedure) Rules 2019 and Practice Direction No. 2 of 2019.Justice Adesanya warned that failure to comply within the stipulated period would cause the protective order to lapse. The dispute followed a 48-hour enforcement notice issued by the Lagos Island Local Government on August 6, 2026, directing occupants of the property to vacate and remove containers and other structures it described as illegal.The notice, signed by A. O. Ojora on behalf of the council engineer, warned that failure to comply within 48 hours would attract appropriate enforcement action under applicable laws and regulations.According to Adebowale, the situation escalated after part of the property was demolished and Yusuf allegedly took possession following the local government’s intervention.She further alleged that the defendants forcefully ejected tenants without notice, demolished part of the structure at night and barricaded the premises with aluminium zinc in preparation for further demolition and construction.In an 11-paragraph affidavit filed in support of the application, a staff member of United Capital Trustee Limited, Babatunde Bello, said the company had managed the property since 2016 without disturbance until the alleged encroachment.Bello stated that Adebowale appointed United Capital Trustee Limited as trustee of her properties through a Deed of Trust dated August 8, 2026.He alleged that on August 19, 2026, the defendants forcibly evicted tenants from the premises without prior notice or Adebowale’s consent before partly demolishing the building.The affidavit further stated that the defendants subsequently barricaded the property with aluminium zinc, allegedly to facilitate the complete demolition of the remaining structure and commencement of construction.Related NewsLagos ranks fourth for luxury two-bedroom rentsLagos man beaten to death weeks before weddingWidow, police families protest demolition of houses in SokotoAdebowale, through her lawyer, Waheed Isiaka of KISAB Solicitors & Attorneys, urged the court to preserve the property pending completion of the pre-action protocol.She relied on Orders 1 and 2 of Practice Direction No. 2 of 2019, which empower the court to grant pre-emptive remedies where necessary in the interest of justice or to prevent irreparable damage or serious mischief.Ruling on the application, Justice Adesanya held that Adebowale had met the conditions for the grant of the pre-emptive remedy.The judge said an applicant must show that failure to grant the order could result in irreparable damage or serious mischief, attach a Memorandum of Claim, establish an urgent need to preserve the subject matter and explain why the pre-action protocol had not been fully complied with.According to the court, the applicant met the requirements through the averments in her affidavits, the Memorandum of Claim and exhibits placed before the court.Justice Adesanya consequently restrained Yusuf, the unidentified defendants, their privies, agents and proxies from completely demolishing, dissipating, excavating or constructing on the disputed property pending full compliance with the pre-action protocol.The judge, however, held that the order was temporary and conditional.She directed the applicant to fully comply with the pre-action protocol within the timelines prescribed by the High Court of Lagos State (Civil Procedure) Rules 2019 and Practice Direction No. 2 of 2019.Justice Adesanya warned that failure to comply within the stipulated period would cause the protective order to lapse. The notice, signed by A. O. Ojora on behalf of the council engineer, warned that failure to comply within 48 hours would attract appropriate enforcement action under applicable laws and regulations.According to Adebowale, the situation escalated after part of the property was demolished and Yusuf allegedly took possession following the local government’s intervention.She further alleged that the defendants forcefully ejected tenants without notice, demolished part of the structure at night and barricaded the premises with aluminium zinc in preparation for further demolition and construction.In an 11-paragraph affidavit filed in support of the application, a staff member of United Capital Trustee Limited, Babatunde Bello, said the company had managed the property since 2016 without disturbance until the alleged encroachment.Bello stated that Adebowale appointed United Capital Trustee Limited as trustee of her properties through a Deed of Trust dated August 8, 2026.He alleged that on August 19, 2026, the defendants forcibly evicted tenants from the premises without prior notice or Adebowale’s consent before partly demolishing the building.The affidavit further stated that the defendants subsequently barricaded the property with aluminium zinc, allegedly to facilitate the complete demolition of the remaining structure and commencement of construction.Related NewsLagos ranks fourth for luxury two-bedroom rentsLagos man beaten to death weeks before weddingWidow, police families protest demolition of houses in SokotoAdebowale, through her lawyer, Waheed Isiaka of KISAB Solicitors & Attorneys, urged the court to preserve the property pending completion of the pre-action protocol.She relied on Orders 1 and 2 of Practice Direction No. 2 of 2019, which empower the court to grant pre-emptive remedies where necessary in the interest of justice or to prevent irreparable damage or serious mischief.Ruling on the application, Justice Adesanya held that Adebowale had met the conditions for the grant of the pre-emptive remedy.The judge said an applicant must show that failure to grant the order could result in irreparable damage or serious mischief, attach a Memorandum of Claim, establish an urgent need to preserve the subject matter and explain why the pre-action protocol had not been fully complied with.According to the court, the applicant met the requirements through the averments in her affidavits, the Memorandum of Claim and exhibits placed before the court.Justice Adesanya consequently restrained Yusuf, the unidentified defendants, their privies, agents and proxies from completely demolishing, dissipating, excavating or constructing on the disputed property pending full compliance with the pre-action protocol.The judge, however, held that the order was temporary and conditional.She directed the applicant to fully comply with the pre-action protocol within the timelines prescribed by the High Court of Lagos State (Civil Procedure) Rules 2019 and Practice Direction No. 2 of 2019.Justice Adesanya warned that failure to comply within the stipulated period would cause the protective order to lapse. According to Adebowale, the situation escalated after part of the property was demolished and Yusuf allegedly took possession following the local government’s intervention.She further alleged that the defendants forcefully ejected tenants without notice, demolished part of the structure at night and barricaded the premises with aluminium zinc in preparation for further demolition and construction.In an 11-paragraph affidavit filed in support of the application, a staff member of United Capital Trustee Limited, Babatunde Bello, said the company had managed the property since 2016 without disturbance until the alleged encroachment.Bello stated that Adebowale appointed United Capital Trustee Limited as trustee of her properties through a Deed of Trust dated August 8, 2026.He alleged that on August 19, 2026, the defendants forcibly evicted tenants from the premises without prior notice or Adebowale’s consent before partly demolishing the building.The affidavit further stated that the defendants subsequently barricaded the property with aluminium zinc, allegedly to facilitate the complete demolition of the remaining structure and commencement of construction.Related NewsLagos ranks fourth for luxury two-bedroom rentsLagos man beaten to death weeks before weddingWidow, police families protest demolition of houses in SokotoAdebowale, through her lawyer, Waheed Isiaka of KISAB Solicitors & Attorneys, urged the court to preserve the property pending completion of the pre-action protocol.She relied on Orders 1 and 2 of Practice Direction No. 2 of 2019, which empower the court to grant pre-emptive remedies where necessary in the interest of justice or to prevent irreparable damage or serious mischief.Ruling on the application, Justice Adesanya held that Adebowale had met the conditions for the grant of the pre-emptive remedy.The judge said an applicant must show that failure to grant the order could result in irreparable damage or serious mischief, attach a Memorandum of Claim, establish an urgent need to preserve the subject matter and explain why the pre-action protocol had not been fully complied with.According to the court, the applicant met the requirements through the averments in her affidavits, the Memorandum of Claim and exhibits placed before the court.Justice Adesanya consequently restrained Yusuf, the unidentified defendants, their privies, agents and proxies from completely demolishing, dissipating, excavating or constructing on the disputed property pending full compliance with the pre-action protocol.The judge, however, held that the order was temporary and conditional.She directed the applicant to fully comply with the pre-action protocol within the timelines prescribed by the High Court of Lagos State (Civil Procedure) Rules 2019 and Practice Direction No. 2 of 2019.Justice Adesanya warned that failure to comply within the stipulated period would cause the protective order to lapse. She further alleged that the defendants forcefully ejected tenants without notice, demolished part of the structure at night and barricaded the premises with aluminium zinc in preparation for further demolition and construction.In an 11-paragraph affidavit filed in support of the application, a staff member of United Capital Trustee Limited, Babatunde Bello, said the company had managed the property since 2016 without disturbance until the alleged encroachment.Bello stated that Adebowale appointed United Capital Trustee Limited as trustee of her properties through a Deed of Trust dated August 8, 2026.He alleged that on August 19, 2026, the defendants forcibly evicted tenants from the premises without prior notice or Adebowale’s consent before partly demolishing the building.The affidavit further stated that the defendants subsequently barricaded the property with aluminium zinc, allegedly to facilitate the complete demolition of the remaining structure and commencement of construction.Related NewsLagos ranks fourth for luxury two-bedroom rentsLagos man beaten to death weeks before weddingWidow, police families protest demolition of houses in SokotoAdebowale, through her lawyer, Waheed Isiaka of KISAB Solicitors & Attorneys, urged the court to preserve the property pending completion of the pre-action protocol.She relied on Orders 1 and 2 of Practice Direction No. 2 of 2019, which empower the court to grant pre-emptive remedies where necessary in the interest of justice or to prevent irreparable damage or serious mischief.Ruling on the application, Justice Adesanya held that Adebowale had met the conditions for the grant of the pre-emptive remedy.The judge said an applicant must show that failure to grant the order could result in irreparable damage or serious mischief, attach a Memorandum of Claim, establish an urgent need to preserve the subject matter and explain why the pre-action protocol had not been fully complied with.According to the court, the applicant met the requirements through the averments in her affidavits, the Memorandum of Claim and exhibits placed before the court.Justice Adesanya consequently restrained Yusuf, the unidentified defendants, their privies, agents and proxies from completely demolishing, dissipating, excavating or constructing on the disputed property pending full compliance with the pre-action protocol.The judge, however, held that the order was temporary and conditional.She directed the applicant to fully comply with the pre-action protocol within the timelines prescribed by the High Court of Lagos State (Civil Procedure) Rules 2019 and Practice Direction No. 2 of 2019.Justice Adesanya warned that failure to comply within the stipulated period would cause the protective order to lapse. In an 11-paragraph affidavit filed in support of the application, a staff member of United Capital Trustee Limited, Babatunde Bello, said the company had managed the property since 2016 without disturbance until the alleged encroachment.Bello stated that Adebowale appointed United Capital Trustee Limited as trustee of her properties through a Deed of Trust dated August 8, 2026.He alleged that on August 19, 2026, the defendants forcibly evicted tenants from the premises without prior notice or Adebowale’s consent before partly demolishing the building.The affidavit further stated that the defendants subsequently barricaded the property with aluminium zinc, allegedly to facilitate the complete demolition of the remaining structure and commencement of construction.Related NewsLagos ranks fourth for luxury two-bedroom rentsLagos man beaten to death weeks before weddingWidow, police families protest demolition of houses in SokotoAdebowale, through her lawyer, Waheed Isiaka of KISAB Solicitors & Attorneys, urged the court to preserve the property pending completion of the pre-action protocol.She relied on Orders 1 and 2 of Practice Direction No. 2 of 2019, which empower the court to grant pre-emptive remedies where necessary in the interest of justice or to prevent irreparable damage or serious mischief.Ruling on the application, Justice Adesanya held that Adebowale had met the conditions for the grant of the pre-emptive remedy.The judge said an applicant must show that failure to grant the order could result in irreparable damage or serious mischief, attach a Memorandum of Claim, establish an urgent need to preserve the subject matter and explain why the pre-action protocol had not been fully complied with.According to the court, the applicant met the requirements through the averments in her affidavits, the Memorandum of Claim and exhibits placed before the court.Justice Adesanya consequently restrained Yusuf, the unidentified defendants, their privies, agents and proxies from completely demolishing, dissipating, excavating or constructing on the disputed property pending full compliance with the pre-action protocol.The judge, however, held that the order was temporary and conditional.She directed the applicant to fully comply with the pre-action protocol within the timelines prescribed by the High Court of Lagos State (Civil Procedure) Rules 2019 and Practice Direction No. 2 of 2019.Justice Adesanya warned that failure to comply within the stipulated period would cause the protective order to lapse. Bello stated that Adebowale appointed United Capital Trustee Limited as trustee of her properties through a Deed of Trust dated August 8, 2026.He alleged that on August 19, 2026, the defendants forcibly evicted tenants from the premises without prior notice or Adebowale’s consent before partly demolishing the building.The affidavit further stated that the defendants subsequently barricaded the property with aluminium zinc, allegedly to facilitate the complete demolition of the remaining structure and commencement of construction.Related NewsLagos ranks fourth for luxury two-bedroom rentsLagos man beaten to death weeks before weddingWidow, police families protest demolition of houses in SokotoAdebowale, through her lawyer, Waheed Isiaka of KISAB Solicitors & Attorneys, urged the court to preserve the property pending completion of the pre-action protocol.She relied on Orders 1 and 2 of Practice Direction No. 2 of 2019, which empower the court to grant pre-emptive remedies where necessary in the interest of justice or to prevent irreparable damage or serious mischief.Ruling on the application, Justice Adesanya held that Adebowale had met the conditions for the grant of the pre-emptive remedy.The judge said an applicant must show that failure to grant the order could result in irreparable damage or serious mischief, attach a Memorandum of Claim, establish an urgent need to preserve the subject matter and explain why the pre-action protocol had not been fully complied with.According to the court, the applicant met the requirements through the averments in her affidavits, the Memorandum of Claim and exhibits placed before the court.Justice Adesanya consequently restrained Yusuf, the unidentified defendants, their privies, agents and proxies from completely demolishing, dissipating, excavating or constructing on the disputed property pending full compliance with the pre-action protocol.The judge, however, held that the order was temporary and conditional.She directed the applicant to fully comply with the pre-action protocol within the timelines prescribed by the High Court of Lagos State (Civil Procedure) Rules 2019 and Practice Direction No. 2 of 2019.Justice Adesanya warned that failure to comply within the stipulated period would cause the protective order to lapse. He alleged that on August 19, 2026, the defendants forcibly evicted tenants from the premises without prior notice or Adebowale’s consent before partly demolishing the building.The affidavit further stated that the defendants subsequently barricaded the property with aluminium zinc, allegedly to facilitate the complete demolition of the remaining structure and commencement of construction.Related NewsLagos ranks fourth for luxury two-bedroom rentsLagos man beaten to death weeks before weddingWidow, police families protest demolition of houses in SokotoAdebowale, through her lawyer, Waheed Isiaka of KISAB Solicitors & Attorneys, urged the court to preserve the property pending completion of the pre-action protocol.She relied on Orders 1 and 2 of Practice Direction No. 2 of 2019, which empower the court to grant pre-emptive remedies where necessary in the interest of justice or to prevent irreparable damage or serious mischief.Ruling on the application, Justice Adesanya held that Adebowale had met the conditions for the grant of the pre-emptive remedy.The judge said an applicant must show that failure to grant the order could result in irreparable damage or serious mischief, attach a Memorandum of Claim, establish an urgent need to preserve the subject matter and explain why the pre-action protocol had not been fully complied with.According to the court, the applicant met the requirements through the averments in her affidavits, the Memorandum of Claim and exhibits placed before the court.Justice Adesanya consequently restrained Yusuf, the unidentified defendants, their privies, agents and proxies from completely demolishing, dissipating, excavating or constructing on the disputed property pending full compliance with the pre-action protocol.The judge, however, held that the order was temporary and conditional.She directed the applicant to fully comply with the pre-action protocol within the timelines prescribed by the High Court of Lagos State (Civil Procedure) Rules 2019 and Practice Direction No. 2 of 2019.Justice Adesanya warned that failure to comply within the stipulated period would cause the protective order to lapse. The affidavit further stated that the defendants subsequently barricaded the property with aluminium zinc, allegedly to facilitate the complete demolition of the remaining structure and commencement of construction.Related NewsLagos ranks fourth for luxury two-bedroom rentsLagos man beaten to death weeks before weddingWidow, police families protest demolition of houses in SokotoAdebowale, through her lawyer, Waheed Isiaka of KISAB Solicitors & Attorneys, urged the court to preserve the property pending completion of the pre-action protocol.She relied on Orders 1 and 2 of Practice Direction No. 2 of 2019, which empower the court to grant pre-emptive remedies where necessary in the interest of justice or to prevent irreparable damage or serious mischief.Ruling on the application, Justice Adesanya held that Adebowale had met the conditions for the grant of the pre-emptive remedy.The judge said an applicant must show that failure to grant the order could result in irreparable damage or serious mischief, attach a Memorandum of Claim, establish an urgent need to preserve the subject matter and explain why the pre-action protocol had not been fully complied with.According to the court, the applicant met the requirements through the averments in her affidavits, the Memorandum of Claim and exhibits placed before the court.Justice Adesanya consequently restrained Yusuf, the unidentified defendants, their privies, agents and proxies from completely demolishing, dissipating, excavating or constructing on the disputed property pending full compliance with the pre-action protocol.The judge, however, held that the order was temporary and conditional.She directed the applicant to fully comply with the pre-action protocol within the timelines prescribed by the High Court of Lagos State (Civil Procedure) Rules 2019 and Practice Direction No. 2 of 2019.Justice Adesanya warned that failure to comply within the stipulated period would cause the protective order to lapse. Adebowale, through her lawyer, Waheed Isiaka of KISAB Solicitors & Attorneys, urged the court to preserve the property pending completion of the pre-action protocol.She relied on Orders 1 and 2 of Practice Direction No. 2 of 2019, which empower the court to grant pre-emptive remedies where necessary in the interest of justice or to prevent irreparable damage or serious mischief.Ruling on the application, Justice Adesanya held that Adebowale had met the conditions for the grant of the pre-emptive remedy.The judge said an applicant must show that failure to grant the order could result in irreparable damage or serious mischief, attach a Memorandum of Claim, establish an urgent need to preserve the subject matter and explain why the pre-action protocol had not been fully complied with.According to the court, the applicant met the requirements through the averments in her affidavits, the Memorandum of Claim and exhibits placed before the court.Justice Adesanya consequently restrained Yusuf, the unidentified defendants, their privies, agents and proxies from completely demolishing, dissipating, excavating or constructing on the disputed property pending full compliance with the pre-action protocol.The judge, however, held that the order was temporary and conditional.She directed the applicant to fully comply with the pre-action protocol within the timelines prescribed by the High Court of Lagos State (Civil Procedure) Rules 2019 and Practice Direction No. 2 of 2019.Justice Adesanya warned that failure to comply within the stipulated period would cause the protective order to lapse. She relied on Orders 1 and 2 of Practice Direction No. 2 of 2019, which empower the court to grant pre-emptive remedies where necessary in the interest of justice or to prevent irreparable damage or serious mischief.Ruling on the application, Justice Adesanya held that Adebowale had met the conditions for the grant of the pre-emptive remedy.The judge said an applicant must show that failure to grant the order could result in irreparable damage or serious mischief, attach a Memorandum of Claim, establish an urgent need to preserve the subject matter and explain why the pre-action protocol had not been fully complied with.According to the court, the applicant met the requirements through the averments in her affidavits, the Memorandum of Claim and exhibits placed before the court.Justice Adesanya consequently restrained Yusuf, the unidentified defendants, their privies, agents and proxies from completely demolishing, dissipating, excavating or constructing on the disputed property pending full compliance with the pre-action protocol.The judge, however, held that the order was temporary and conditional.She directed the applicant to fully comply with the pre-action protocol within the timelines prescribed by the High Court of Lagos State (Civil Procedure) Rules 2019 and Practice Direction No. 2 of 2019.Justice Adesanya warned that failure to comply within the stipulated period would cause the protective order to lapse. Ruling on the application, Justice Adesanya held that Adebowale had met the conditions for the grant of the pre-emptive remedy.The judge said an applicant must show that failure to grant the order could result in irreparable damage or serious mischief, attach a Memorandum of Claim, establish an urgent need to preserve the subject matter and explain why the pre-action protocol had not been fully complied with.According to the court, the applicant met the requirements through the averments in her affidavits, the Memorandum of Claim and exhibits placed before the court.Justice Adesanya consequently restrained Yusuf, the unidentified defendants, their privies, agents and proxies from completely demolishing, dissipating, excavating or constructing on the disputed property pending full compliance with the pre-action protocol.The judge, however, held that the order was temporary and conditional.She directed the applicant to fully comply with the pre-action protocol within the timelines prescribed by the High Court of Lagos State (Civil Procedure) Rules 2019 and Practice Direction No. 2 of 2019.Justice Adesanya warned that failure to comply within the stipulated period would cause the protective order to lapse. The judge said an applicant must show that failure to grant the order could result in irreparable damage or serious mischief, attach a Memorandum of Claim, establish an urgent need to preserve the subject matter and explain why the pre-action protocol had not been fully complied with.According to the court, the applicant met the requirements through the averments in her affidavits, the Memorandum of Claim and exhibits placed before the court.Justice Adesanya consequently restrained Yusuf, the unidentified defendants, their privies, agents and proxies from completely demolishing, dissipating, excavating or constructing on the disputed property pending full compliance with the pre-action protocol.The judge, however, held that the order was temporary and conditional.She directed the applicant to fully comply with the pre-action protocol within the timelines prescribed by the High Court of Lagos State (Civil Procedure) Rules 2019 and Practice Direction No. 2 of 2019.Justice Adesanya warned that failure to comply within the stipulated period would cause the protective order to lapse. According to the court, the applicant met the requirements through the averments in her affidavits, the Memorandum of Claim and exhibits placed before the court.Justice Adesanya consequently restrained Yusuf, the unidentified defendants, their privies, agents and proxies from completely demolishing, dissipating, excavating or constructing on the disputed property pending full compliance with the pre-action protocol.The judge, however, held that the order was temporary and conditional.She directed the applicant to fully comply with the pre-action protocol within the timelines prescribed by the High Court of Lagos State (Civil Procedure) Rules 2019 and Practice Direction No. 2 of 2019.Justice Adesanya warned that failure to comply within the stipulated period would cause the protective order to lapse. Justice Adesanya consequently restrained Yusuf, the unidentified defendants, their privies, agents and proxies from completely demolishing, dissipating, excavating or constructing on the disputed property pending full compliance with the pre-action protocol.The judge, however, held that the order was temporary and conditional.She directed the applicant to fully comply with the pre-action protocol within the timelines prescribed by the High Court of Lagos State (Civil Procedure) Rules 2019 and Practice Direction No. 2 of 2019.Justice Adesanya warned that failure to comply within the stipulated period would cause the protective order to lapse. The judge, however, held that the order was temporary and conditional.She directed the applicant to fully comply with the pre-action protocol within the timelines prescribed by the High Court of Lagos State (Civil Procedure) Rules 2019 and Practice Direction No. 2 of 2019.Justice Adesanya warned that failure to comply within the stipulated period would cause the protective order to lapse. She directed the applicant to fully comply with the pre-action protocol within the timelines prescribed by the High Court of Lagos State (Civil Procedure) Rules 2019 and Practice Direction No. 2 of 2019.Justice Adesanya warned that failure to comply within the stipulated period would cause the protective order to lapse. Justice Adesanya warned that failure to comply within the stipulated period would cause the protective order to lapse.