Appeal Filed Against Marriage Certificate Ruling in Estate Dispute
Former Miss Nigeria, Mrs. Helen Presto Ajayi, along with her daughter, Tosin Ajayi, is challenging the June 17, 2026 ruling from the Lagos State High Court in Ikeja concerning the estate of the late medical entrepreneur, Dr. Tosin Ajayi. The duo has approached the Lagos Court of Appeal, seeking to overturn the earlier decision.
Represented by attorney Abiodun Owonikoko from San State, the appellants have raised multiple legal concerns regarding the trial court’s judgment. They assert that the lower court relied on a disputed marriage certificate and failed to honor a consent decree that acknowledged Helen Presto Ajayi as the deceased’s spouse. Additionally, they contest the mischaracterization of Tomisin Ajayi’s status and argue that the trial court exceeded its jurisdiction by making determinations beyond the matters presented.
Central to their argument is the trial court’s determination that Mrs. Adenike Ajayi was the sole surviving wife of Dr. Ajayi, allowing her exclusive control over his intestate estate. The appellants contend that this conclusion was artificially constructed on the dubious marriage certificate, the authenticity of which was seriously contested during the trial.
They maintain that the respondents failed to substantiate the certificate’s validity with credible evidence. Furthermore, they have pointed out the absence of any formal record of the alleged marriage in the Ijebu Ode Marriage Registry, claiming the documents submitted for evidence were mere copies that were authenticated only during the course of the trial.
During cross-examination, the first defendant allegedly acknowledged the lack of any official record pertaining to the marriage. The appellants argue that the trial court’s decision, which relied on this dubious document, contradicted the weight of existing evidence in the absence of a legitimate marriage registration, ledger entry, or independent verification.
Moreover, the appellants criticize the trial court for neglecting a prior consent decree from January 2021 issued by the Lagos State High Court. This decree recognized both Helen Presto Ajayi and Adenike Ajayi as co-wives of the deceased. They argue this earlier judgment, validated and accepted as Exhibit C13, should have served as an issue estoppel that the trial court was obligated to recognize.
In their appeal, the appellants also take issue with the court’s characterization of Tomisin Ajayi, asserting that the trial court mistakenly concluded she was born out of wedlock. They argue this view stemmed from the court’s dismissal of Helen Presto Ajayi’s marital status and an inadequate evaluation of the presented evidence. They cite a British-issued birth certificate that identifies Dr. Tosin Ajayi and Helen Presto Ajayi as Tomisin’s parents and assert that Tomisin resided solely with her parents until the time of Dr. Ajayi’s death.
Despite the evidence indicating Tomisin’s legitimacy and a previous acknowledgment by the first respondent about her being the deceased’s child, the trial court reportedly labeled her as a child born out of wedlock. The appellants contend that these findings were unwarranted and went beyond the scope of the case, which was only intended to establish parties eligible for letters of administration of the estate.
Furthermore, the appellants assert that the High Court overstepped its jurisdiction by deciding the distribution of the intestate estate. According to the Estate Administration Act, such decisions are designated to duly appointed personal representatives under the Probate Registry’s purview, not determined during the phase of establishing rights to letters of administration.
Consequently, the appellants have requested that the Court of Appeals annul the trial court’s judgment in its entirety, maintain their defense, and dismiss the respondents’ case. They also seek a stay on the enforcement of the judgment pending the resolution of the appeal, cautioning that implementing the ruling could jeopardize significant property assets and potentially undermine their appeal if it is ultimately successful.
