Reported by Weng Patrick Atokor l Journalist at Weng Global
A Lagos State High Court has fixed October 20, 2026, to hear an application concerning the service of court processes on Nigerian comedian and brand influencer Emmanuel Chukwuebuka Ejekwu, popularly known as Oga Sabinus, in a contractual dispute involving Arcadia Hospitality Limited, also known as 22BET.
The company is seeking the refund of a €40,750 advance payment it says was made to Sabinus under a marketing agreement, alleging that he failed to carry out promotional and brand ambassador obligations contained in the contract.
The case, marked LD/ADR/6557/2026, is before Justice Adebayo A. Oyebanji of the High Court of Lagos State sitting at Tapa, Lagos. Sabinus’ manager, Obinna Michael Nwabufo, popularly known as Mike Premium, is also named as a defendant.
What the dispute is about
According to the claimant’s case as reported by Nigerian media, 22BET entered into a Marketing Service Agreement with Sabinus in February 2024.
The agreement allegedly covered marketing, promotional and brand ambassador services for the betting company, with a total remuneration of €163,000.
Under the alleged arrangement, €40,750 was to be paid as an advance, while the remaining amount was structured for payment in quarterly instalments.
22BET alleges that it paid the €40,750 advance in two equal instalments on February 8 and 9, 2024, into a cryptocurrency wallet address allegedly supplied by Nwabufo on behalf of Sabinus’ management.
The company said the defendants confirmed that the wallet had been credited. It subsequently alleged, however, that the promotional services covered by the agreement were not performed.
The allegations have not been established by a final judgment, and the dispute remains before the court.
Promotional obligations at the centre of the case
The claimant alleges that the marketing agreement required Sabinus to undertake a range of promotional activities for 22BET.
Among the obligations identified in reports on the case are publishing promotional materials on social media, wearing the 22BET logo, participating in television commercial productions and placing a 22BET link in his social media biography.
The agreement also allegedly required the comedian to create an Instagram highlight and attend 22BET events and press conferences.
22BET claims that repeated efforts to secure performance of the obligations were unsuccessful.
The company further alleges that Sabinus and his manager later maintained that, although the cryptocurrency wallet had been credited, they did not ultimately receive value from the payment.
According to the claimant, that position did not remove the contractual obligations because the agreement allegedly contained provisions requiring any modification or waiver to be made in writing and signed by the parties.
22BET seeks refund and damages
Following what it described as non-performance, 22BET reportedly issued demand letters dated June 1, 2026.
The company said the agreement was subsequently terminated and demanded repayment of the €40,750 advance.
22BET is asking the Lagos High Court to declare that Sabinus breached the marketing agreement and to order the defendants to jointly refund the advance payment.
The claimant is also seeking 10 per cent annual interest on the €40,750 from February 8, 2024, until judgment, in addition to general and special damages and the costs of the legal action.
These are claims made by the claimant. They do not constitute a finding by the court that Sabinus or his manager breached the agreement.
Why the October 20 hearing matters
The October 20 proceeding is not, based on the available reports, a final determination of whether Sabinus breached the contract.
Instead, the hearing concerns an application by 22BET seeking permission to serve court processes on Sabinus and Nwabufo by substituted means.
The distinction is important because the case is still at an early procedural stage. A hearing on service of court documents does not amount to a judgment on the underlying contractual dispute.
The next significant development will therefore be how the court handles the application and how the defendants respond to the claims brought against them.
A dispute involving entertainment and commercial endorsements
The case highlights the increasingly commercial nature of Nigeria’s entertainment industry, where comedians, musicians, actors and digital creators frequently enter into marketing and brand endorsement agreements.
Such arrangements can involve substantial sums and detailed obligations concerning social media promotions, appearances, advertising content, branding and public events.
When contractual obligations are disputed, the courts may be called upon to determine what the parties agreed to, whether the obligations were performed, whether the agreement was validly terminated and what remedies may be available.
In the Sabinus case, the alleged use of a cryptocurrency wallet in connection with the advance payment adds another financial element to the dispute. However, the available reports do not establish the parties’ competing positions beyond the allegations contained in the claimant’s case.
Sabinus’ position
The reports reviewed by Weng Global detail the allegations and claims made by 22BET. They do not provide a substantive response from Sabinus or his manager addressing the company’s allegations.
Weng Global therefore does not present the allegations as established facts.
Any response filed by the defendants, or any substantive ruling by the Lagos State High Court, would provide further context to the dispute.
What happens next
The Lagos State High Court is scheduled to hear the application relating to service of the court processes on October 20, 2026.
The underlying contractual claims remain unresolved.
The court will ultimately have to consider the evidence and arguments presented by the parties before determining whether the alleged marketing agreement was breached and whether 22BET is entitled to the refund, interest, damages and other reliefs it is seeking.
For now, the central issue is a commercial dispute between a betting company and a prominent Nigerian entertainer over an alleged €40,750 advance payment and the performance of contractual promotional obligations.
No final judgment on the merits of those allegations has been reported.
Weng Global – Stories beyond borders
Sources
- Galaxy TV — report on the €40,750 refund suit and October 20 hearing.
- Independent News Express — report on the alleged breach of the 22BET marketing agreement and court application.
- LawSnapshots — listing of Leadership Nigeria’s report on the 22BET-Sabinus contract dispute.
