By Our Correspondent
The Lagos State High Court sitting in Ikoyi has fixed October 12, 2026, to rule on an application by Eurapharma Care Services Nigeria Limited, operators of Euracare Multi-Specialist Hospital, seeking to stop the coroner’s inquest into the death of Nkanu Adichie-Esege, son of Nigerian author Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie and her husband, Dr Ivara Esege.
Justice Aishat Opesanwo reserved the date after hearing arguments from the hospital, Nkanu’s parents, the Lagos State Government and Atlantis Paediatric Hospital Limited.
Eurapharma is seeking judicial review of decisions made during the coroner’s proceedings and asking the court to issue orders of certiorari quashing the decisions and prohibition restraining Magistrate Atinuke Adetunji, the coroner handling the case, from continuing with the inquest.
The hospital’s challenge centres on two issues: the order in which parties should present evidence and whether the coroner can continue the proceedings following the cremation of Nkanu’s remains.
Nkanu, who was 21 months old, died on January 7, 2026, at Euracare Multi-Specialist Hospital in Lagos after undergoing medical treatment.
His parents subsequently raised allegations concerning the treatment their son received. Euracare has denied wrongdoing and maintained that its medical personnel acted appropriately.
Counsel for Eurapharma, Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Prof. Taiwo Osipitan, argued that the hospital should not be compelled to present its evidence before Nkanu’s family, which raised allegations of medical negligence, had presented its case.
Osipitan told the court that Eurapharma had never agreed to lead evidence first, maintaining that an earlier agreement between the parties only concerned the scheduling of proceedings.
He argued that requiring the hospital to open its case first could undermine its right to a fair hearing, particularly because allegations of medical incompetence had been made against its personnel.
The SAN contended that although a coroner’s inquest is inquisitorial rather than a conventional trial, the circumstances of the case had made the proceedings “accusatorial in substance.”
He therefore urged the court to intervene and prevent the hospital from being compelled to lead evidence before the family.
The hospital also challenged the continuation of the inquest following the cremation of Nkanu’s remains.
Osipitan relied on provisions of the Lagos State Coroners System Law, particularly Sections 14 and 15, to argue that the coroner’s jurisdiction was connected to the presence of the deceased’s body within the relevant district.
He submitted that determining the cause and circumstances of death would ordinarily require a post-mortem examination, which he said was no longer possible following the cremation.
The lawyer further argued that Section 31 of the law, which allows the coroner to dispense with inspection in certain circumstances, did not cover a situation where the remains were no longer available.
He told the court that the Lagos State Chief Pathologist neither conducted a post-mortem examination nor authorised the cremation.
Osipitan consequently asked the court to grant the orders of certiorari and prohibition sought by Eurapharma.
However, counsel to Nkanu’s parents, Kemi Pinheiro, SAN, urged the court to dismiss the hospital’s case, describing the application as premature.
Pinheiro argued that the coroner had not made any substantive decision or determination of rights that could be quashed through judicial review.
He said no witness had testified, no evidence had been taken and no substantive finding had been made by the coroner.
The lawyer likened the hospital’s action to a “Usain Bolt/Ben Johnson suit,” arguing that Eurapharma had approached the High Court before there was any substantive decision for the court to review.
Pinheiro also maintained that a coroner’s inquest is a fact-finding proceeding and not a criminal trial, stressing that it does not determine criminal guilt.
According to him, any findings eventually reached by the coroner could be forwarded to the appropriate authorities, including the Attorney-General and Director of Public Prosecutions, for consideration of further action.
On the issue of the cremated remains, Pinheiro relied on Sections 21 and 31(1) of the Lagos State Coroners System Law.
He argued that the legislation makes provision for an inquest where the body of a deceased person has been destroyed or cannot be recovered.
The SAN particularly referred to the words “if any” in Section 31(1), which deals with the coroner viewing the body, arguing that the absence of the remains did not automatically deprive the coroner of jurisdiction.
The Lagos State Attorney-General and Commissioner for Justice, Lawal Pedro, SAN, also opposed the hospital’s application.
Pedro argued that the judicial review action was premature and maintained that the Coroners System Law gives the coroner discretion to proceed with an inquest where a body has been destroyed or is unavailable.
He urged the court to allow the coroner to exercise the powers granted under the law instead of halting the proceedings at a preliminary stage.
Counsel representing Atlantis Paediatric Hospital Limited, Abiodun Layonu, SAN, and Adeniji Kazeem, SAN, also urged the court to reject Eurapharma’s application.
They argued that the issue concerning the order of evidence had already been addressed during proceedings before the coroner on April 14, when it was agreed that Nkanu’s family would present its evidence first.
They also relied on Sections 21 and 40 of the Lagos State Coroners System Law in arguing that an inquest could continue even where the deceased’s body was unavailable.
The lawyers urged the High Court to dismiss the hospital’s case and allow the coroner’s proceedings to continue.
The latest legal challenge follows an earlier decision by the Lagos State High Court in June to grant Eurapharma leave to commence judicial review proceedings and temporarily stay the coroner’s inquest pending determination of the substantive case.
The hospital had argued that the cremation of Nkanu’s remains made a post-mortem examination impossible and that the coroner had issued procedural directions requiring Eurapharma to present evidence first.
Nkanu’s parents had previously raised allegations concerning his treatment at Euracare, including claims relating to monitoring, sedation and emergency response. Euracare has rejected allegations of medical negligence.
Justice Opesanwo has now reserved ruling on the hospital’s application and preliminary objections until October 12, 2026.
The ruling will determine whether the judicial review challenge can proceed and whether the coroner’s inquest can continue despite the hospital’s objections concerning the order of evidence and the absence of Nkanu’s remains.
