In a letter dated October 4, 2025, and signed by the Director of Legal Services, Mrs. Yinka Ayantola, the university drew attention to what it described as a procedural irregularity in the legal correspondence sent by Kene Nnadi of F.K. Nnadi & Co, a law firm based in Enugu State.
According to OAU, the lawyer’s pre-action notice bore a 2024 Nigerian Bar Association (NBA) seal, suggesting that he had not updated his practicing license for 2025 as required by the Rules of Professional Conduct for Legal Practitioners.
The university’s letter read in part:
“It is our observation that the seal you affixed to your letter under reference is your 2024 seal. As you are aware, you have a duty to pay your practicing fee for 2025 to enable you to write as a lawyer. It is therefore our request that you establish your right to practice for the year as required by the relevant regulations. I have the instructions of the University to request you to do the needful.”
The correspondence, issued through OAU’s Legal Unit, serves as an official response to the pre-action notice earlier filed by the Enugu-based law firm, which had accused the university of alleged procedural lapses in its Post-UTME admission process.
While the university did not address the substantive allegations in its reply, its focus on the procedural validity of the lawyer’s seal underscores a potential legal contention over standing and compliance with professional requirements.
Under Section 10 of the Legal Practitioners Act and Rule 10 of the Rules of Professional Conduct, lawyers in Nigeria are required to renew their annual practicing license and use the corresponding NBA stamp and seal for all legal documents within that year. Failure to do so can render such documents invalid in court or official proceedings.
As of the time of filing this report, Mr. Nnadi had not publicly responded to OAU’s position. It also remains unclear whether his firm intends to pursue the matter further or provide proof of current professional accreditation.
The exchange marks a new twist in the dispute over OAU’s Post-UTME process, adding a procedural layer to what may evolve into a wider legal challenge concerning examination and admission transparency at one of Nigeria’s foremost universities.