Former beauty queen, Mrs. Helen Prest-Ajayi, and her daughter, Tomisin Ajayi, have filed an appeal against the June 17, 2026 judgment of the Lagos State High Court which recognised Mrs. Adenike Oluwayemisi Ajayi as the sole lawful widow of the late founder and Chief Executive Officer of First Foundation Hospital, Dr. Tosin Ajayi.
The appeal, lodged before the Court of Appeal, Lagos Division, seeks to set aside the entire judgment delivered by Justice Oluwayoyin Odusanya in Suit No. ID/3364LM/2021 between Mrs. Adenike Oluyemisi Ajayi and five others, and Ms. Helen Davies and another.
In the notice of appeal dated June 18, 2026, Helen Prest-Ajayi, who stated that she was wrongly sued as Helen Davies, and her daughter raised five grounds of appeal challenging key findings made by the trial court on marital status, legitimacy, evidence and the administration of the deceased’s estate.
Justice Odusanya had, in the judgment delivered on Wednesday, declared Adenike Ajayi as the sole and lawful widow of Dr. Ajayi, holding that her statutory marriage to the deceased was never dissolved and that separation, regardless of duration, could not terminate a valid marriage.
The court had also dismissed Prest-Ajayi’s claim that she contracted a Kalabari customary marriage with the late medical practitioner, holding that she failed to establish the existence of such marriage by credible evidence.
The judge further held that even if the alleged customary marriage had been proved, it would still have been invalid because evidence before the court showed that Prest-Ajayi was still legally married to her former husband, Mr. Davies, at the time she claimed to have married Dr. Ajayi.
The court consequently upheld Adenike Ajayi’s entitlement to one-third of the deceased’s personal estate and ruled that she was the only spouse entitled to apply for letters of administration over the estate.
However, in their appeal, Prest-Ajayi and Tomisin argued that the trial court erred in describing Prest-Ajayi as a mistress of the deceased despite what they described as an existing consent judgment delivered by a court of coordinate jurisdiction in January 2021, which allegedly recognised Prest-Ajayi and Adenike Ajayi as co-wives of the late medical practitioner.
The appellants contended that the earlier judgment was pleaded and tendered in evidence but was not given due consideration by the trial court before it reached a contrary conclusion.
According to them, “the status of co-wives does not exclude either wife from being recognised as such.”
They also challenged the trial court’s finding that Tomisin Ajayi was born out of wedlock, insisting that evidence before the court established that she was a legitimate child of the deceased.
The appellants argued that Tomisin was born during what they described as a 25-year marital relationship between Prest-Ajayi and Dr. Ajayi, adding that documentary evidence, including a United Kingdom birth certificate and oral testimony, identified her parents as a couple.
They further claimed that Adenike Ajayi acknowledged Tomisin’s status as a child of the deceased during proceedings and that her paternity was not successfully challenged at trial.
Another ground of appeal concerns the statutory marriage relied upon by Adenike Ajayi. The appellants argued that the authenticity of the marriage certificate was disputed during trial and that the claimants failed to produce evidence from the marriage registry to establish its validity.
They alleged that the registry had no official record of the marriage and that the trial court relied on a photocopied document without external verification.
The appellants also faulted the court’s determination of Prest-Ajayi’s marital status, arguing that the principal issue before the court was whether Adenike Ajayi was entitled to administer the estate of the deceased and not whether Prest-Ajayi should be characterised as a mistress or undocumented partner.
They contended that the trial court granted reliefs that were neither sought by the claimants nor supported by evidence, including pronouncements describing Prest-Ajayi as a mistress, undocumented partner and mother of the deceased’s child.
The appellants further argued that the court exceeded its jurisdiction when it pronounced on the ratio and quantum to be adopted in distributing the estate of the late Dr. Ajayi among beneficiaries.
According to them, the issue before the court was limited to determining who was entitled to apply for letters of administration, while the ascertainment and distribution of shares in an estate are matters reserved for estate administrators and the probate registry after the grant of letters of administration.
Prest-Ajayi and Tomisin are asking the Court of Appeal to set aside the judgment of the Lagos High Court, uphold the defence presented at trial and dismiss the suit filed by Adenike Ajayi and her children.