A Lagos-based lawyer, Dr Sheriff Abiodun Adesanya, has filed a suit against Air Peace Limited before the Federal High Court, Lagos, challenging what he described as the airline’s unlawful “seat-only” business-class upgrade policy.
The suit, marked FHC/L/CS/364/2026 and pending before Justice Chukwujekwu Aneke, raises significant questions about airline transparency, passenger rights, and consumer protection within Nigeria’s aviation sector.
The issue borders on whether an airline can lawfully sell a business-class upgrade seat to a passenger in the premium cabin, yet deny the accompanying services typically associated with that class, without prior disclosure.
Adesanya, who is representing himself, told the court that he paid for a business-class upgrade on a London–Lagos–London trip but was allegedly served economy-class meals and received what he described as “economy-level service,” despite being seated in the business-class cabin.
According to court papers, the incident first occurred on a London Gatwick–Lagos flight and was allegedly repeated on the return leg, even after the claimant had issued a pre-action notice to the airline.
The claimant contended that the airline operates a policy under which upgraded passengers are entitled only to premium seating, not the full range of business-class services.
He argued that this limitation was neither disclosed prior to payment nor reflected in any published terms and conditions available to passengers.
In the originating summons, Adesanya seeks several declaratory reliefs, including a pronouncement that the practice amounts to misrepresentation, unfair treatment, and a breach of statutory consumer protection obligations.
The suit invokes provisions of the Civil Aviation Act 2022, the Nigerian Civil Aviation Regulations 2023, and the Montreal Convention 1999, which collectively govern airline obligations and passenger rights.
He is also seeking refunds and damages for the alleged failure of the airline to provide services commensurate with the upgraded class.
The airline, however, maintained that passengers are informed of these limitations prior to payment and notes that business-class catering is typically pre-ordered.
Air Peace legal counsel, Chief Oluwole Afolabi, has filed a preliminary objection seeking to strike out the suit.
The airline argued that the matter is fact-intensive and involves substantial disputes, particularly regarding what was communicated to the passenger and the nature of the services provided, making it unsuitable for determination by originating summons.
It urged the court to hold that such disputes require oral evidence and cross-examination.
Adesanya has opposed the objection, describing it as misconceived and a deliberate attempt to delay proceedings.
In a counter-affidavit deposed to by a litigation clerk in his law firm, the claimant maintained that there are no substantial disputes of fact requiring oral evidence.
He further argued that the airline has not filed any counter-affidavit to challenge the facts already placed before the court.
Relying on authorities including Inakoju v. Adeleke and Ajomale v. Yaduat, the claimant contended that unchallenged affidavit evidence should be deemed admitted.
He further submits that the central issue before the court is purely a question of law—whether it is lawful for an airline to sell a restricted business-class upgrade without prior disclosure of service limitations.
The claimant also raises a procedural objection, arguing that the airline’s preliminary objection was filed outside the 31-day period prescribed by the Federal High Court Rules, and is therefore incompetent.
The court is expected to first determine the preliminary objection before proceeding to the substantive issues.
