London court halts transfer over north London home amid identity-fraud allegations involving Nigerian general

A London tribunal has halted a high-profile bid to transfer ownership of a north London house after finding that the claimed owner and his supposed associate did not hold title and that the central claimant may be fictitious. In a ruling at the first-tier property chamber, Judge Ewan Paton said the property at 79 Randall Avenue in Neasden should not be registered in the name of Chief Mike Agbedor Abu Ozekhome or in the name of a person identified as 'Ms Tali Shani.' He concluded that the real owner was Jeremiah Useni, a former Nigerian general and government minister who died in January, and that the person described as 'Ms Tali Shani' never existed. The decision leaves the house as part of Useni’s estate and effectively blocks the transfer sought by Ozekhome.

The case began in February 2023 when Chief Ozekhome, a prominent Nigerian barrister and human rights activist, applied to the Land Registry to have the ownership of the three-bedroom home transferred to him, saying he had received it as a gift in gratitude for his legal services. A man identified as 'Mr Tali Shani' backed the account, claiming he had previously owned the property before appointing Useni to manage it. At the same time, solicitors for a supposed 'Ms Tali Shani' objected to the transfer, insisting she was the true owner. The tribunal therefore faced a complex conflict where both 'Mr' and 'Ms' Tali Shani claimed ownership of the same house, a situation underscored by questions about the true identity of 'Ms Tali Shani.'

The judge’s investigation revealed that the three-bedroom property had last been sold in 1993 for £110,000 and is now believed to be worth roughly £650,000. In the 2023 application, Ozekhome asserted he had given the house to Useni as a gift, purportedly for legal services rendered. Yet the case quickly unfolded around disputed and unverified identities: a person claiming to be 'Ms Tali Shani' never appeared before the tribunal despite multiple adjournments, and a witness later said the supposed owner of the property had died in a road accident in late 2024. Another witness asserted a cousin relationship to 'Ms Tali Shani' and described a long association with Useni. A Nigerian government official told the tribunal that the documents underpinning those identities were forged and that the claimed home address did not exist.

Judge Paton described the proceedings as generating an extraordinary set of allegations, noting that at the heart of the dispute were identity fraud and impersonation. He concluded that the identity documents used to confirm 'Ms Tali Shani' were fraudulent and that her claimed existence was implausible. The judge found that a person named 'Mr Tali Shani' clearly exists, but it was unlikely that he could have purchased 79 Randall Avenue in 1993, when he would have been around 20 years old and working as a cattle herder. The court suggested that the real owner was General Useni, and that the transfer to Ozekhome or the arrangement involving 'Ms Tali Shani' may have been designed to avoid stamp duty or to serve some other purpose not tied to legitimate ownership.

The ruling also scrutinized the conduct of a solicitor involved in the proceedings. Judge Paton said it was not possible to determine that Kingsley Efemuai acted dishonestly, but he criticized the solicitor for displaying a troubling level of complacency and credulity in managing the case, describing it as the most astonishing example of misleading conduct in a property matter he had encountered. While the judge left open questions about motive, he affirmed that the Land Registry should reject the application to register a transfer of the Neasden property and indicated that the asset would be treated as part of General Useni’s estate.

In delivering the decision, the judge highlighted the broader implications for property records and due process. He noted that the case illustrates how high-profile individuals may become entangled in disputes that hinge on the integrity of identity documents and the authenticity of ownership claims. The tribunal’s ruling provides a definitive turn in a long-running battle but does not close every possible avenue for dispute. It leaves open questions about any remaining assets connected to Useni’s estate and potential further inquiries into the circumstances surrounding the alleged involvement of public officials and professionals in the case. The Daily Mail has reported on the case, and the court’s decision without any finding of personal dishonesty by Ozekhome, but with a clear admonition of the need for scrupulous handling of property transactions.

For readers following cross-border property actions, the Neasden case underscores how identity questions and cross-border histories can transform what begins as a routine title transfer into a complex litigation that tests the reliability of records and the oversight of professionals involved in property transactions.