The case was adjourned after lawyers to both parties adopted their arguments on Monday before Justice E.D. Subilim.

In the suit marked NICN/ABJ/17/2026, the FCTA listed JUAC Chairman, Rifkatu Iortyer, and Secretary, Abdullahi Umar Saleh, as defendants, seeking an interlocutory injunction to restrain the union from further strike actions, picketing, or lockouts.

The industrial action commenced last Monday following the expiration of a seven-day ultimatum and has since disrupted operations across key FCTA offices, including the FCTA Secretariat, where security personnel were deployed to restrict access.

While the FCTA insists that most of the workers’ demands have been met, JUAC maintains that several fundamental issues remain unresolved.

During Monday’s proceedings, counsel to the union, Maxwell Opara, urged the court to dismiss the FCTA’s application, arguing that granting the reliefs sought would amount to determining the substantive matter at an interlocutory stage.

Relying on the Supreme Court decision in Opara Agwu & Anor v. Julius Berger Plc, Opara cautioned that compelling workers to resume duties while salary issues remained unsettled could be counterproductive. He also asked the court to consider directing the FCT minister to submit to arbitration.

After hearing submissions from both sides, Justice Subilim adjourned the matter to January 27 for ruling on the application for injunction.

Speaking to journalists after the session, counsel to the claimants, James Onoja (SAN), argued that the defendants lacked juristic personality. He contended that JUAC was neither registered under the Companies and Allied Matters Act (CAMA) nor recognised under the Trade Union Act.

According to him, “Those who called the strike are an illegal body. JUAC is not registered under the Trade Union Act, and as such, it has no authority to declare a strike. That is our position before the court.

“The government is willing to listen. Mediation was ongoing before they headed to court. There are laid-down procedures before declaring a strike, and those procedures were not followed.”

Opara, however, countered that the union had written no fewer than 11 letters to the minister, outlining its grievances and requestingeeking mediation, insisting that the dispute ought to have been resolved through alternative dispute resolution mechanisms.

“This is an attempt to intimidate workers through the courts. Is dialogue not enough? We made it clear that the proper step was mediation, not an application to force hungry and angry workers back to work. That is even more dangerous,” he said.

On the decision to seek the joinder of the Nigeria Labour Congress (NLC) and the Trade Union Congress (TUC), Opara explained that the defendants were sued in their personal capacities.

“If the court orders the strike to be called off, such an order would only bind two individuals. But JUAC operates under Labour and TUC, and both bodies have already issued directives calling for solidarity actions. That makes them necessary parties to this suit,” he argued.