KPMG vs KPMG Lawsuit Heads To Supreme Court

KPMG Professional Services has filed a Notice of Appeal at the Supreme Court of Nigeria, challenging the judgment delivered by the Court of Appeal on July 10, 2025, in favour of KPMG Nigeria. However, the appeal does not automatically stop enforcement of the judgment, meaning KPMG Nigeria may lawfully proceed with steps to assert exclusive control over the KPMG brand in Nigeria.

The dispute stems from a long-running corporate identity battle over the use of the globally recognised “KPMG” name. In its appeal, KPMG Professional Services is seeking to set aside the Court of Appeal’s ruling and restore the Federal High Court’s 2005 decision, which had allowed it to retain its business registration and use of the KPMG name.

The Appellant is asking the Supreme Court to determine several key legal issues, including:

• Whether the Federal High Court had jurisdiction to grant the reliefs initially sought by KPMG Nigeria;

• Whether the Court of Appeal erred in failing to rule on a notice to contend filed by the Appellant;

• And whether KPMG Nigeria had waived its right to object to the Appellant’s use of the name “KPMG” and its associated logo.

The appeal was filed as of right on July 17, 2025, but under established Nigerian jurisprudence, an appeal—even to the highest court, does not by itself suspend the effect of a lower court’s judgment.

The filing of a Notice of Appeal does not operate as a stay. The judgment remains valid and enforceable unless specifically stayed, citing precedent from the Supreme Court in Vaswani Trading Co. v. Savalakh & Co. (1972) 12 SC 77.

This view is echoed by additional authorities, including:

• Okafor v. Nnaife (1987) 4 NWLR (Pt. 64) 129, which held that a judgment is binding and enforceable until overturned or stayed.

• T.S.A. Industries Ltd. v. Kema Investments Ltd. (2006) 2 NWLR (Pt. 964) 300 – affirming the right of a judgment creditor to enjoy the fruits of judgment.

• Akibu v. Oduntan (1991) 2 NWLR (Pt. 171) 1 and Josien Holdings Ltd. v. Lornamead Ltd. (1995) 1 NWLR (Pt. 371) 254 – both reinforcing the principle that enforcement may proceed absent a judicial stay.

This means KPMG Nigeria may lawfully act on the Court of Appeal’s decision, including:

• Requesting the CAC to deregister KPMG Professional Services.

• Issuing a public notice dissociating itself from the Appellant.

• Writing to the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to clarify trademark and market representation.

• And initiating a damages inquiry as previously ordered by the Court of Appeal.

Unless and until KPMG Professional Services secures a stay of execution from the Supreme Court or the Court of Appeal, these enforcement measures are legally permissible and may commence without delay.

The Supreme Court appeal will be led by senior legal counsel from Sofunde, Osakwe, Ogundipe & Belgore, including E.O. Sofunde SAN and L.O. Akangbe SAN. KPMG Nigeria is represented by Idowu Sofola & Co, and the CAC is represented by Emmanuel Umoren & Co.

As this high-profile corporate identity dispute moves to Nigeria’s apex court, the legal and business communities will be watching closely, not only for the eventual ruling but also for whether KPMG Professional Services takes steps to seek a stay of execution that could pause the impending enforcement actions by its rivals.

Read More:

• AU Special Sahel Envoy Engages in High-Level Talks with Mali’s Goita
• Bill Gates Uses Philanthropy and Foreign Influence to Shape African Laws and Food Systems

About The Author

West Africa Weekly

author

See author's posts