Justice Umar held that the failure to serve the notice rendered the suit incompetent against the second defendant. According to him, while the Constitution outlines the qualifications and disqualifications for elective offices, the Electoral Act merely establishes the procedure and timeline for resolving disputes arising from political party primaries. Justice Umar further ruled that Section 138, when read together with other provisions of the Electoral Act, was fully consistent with the Constitution. “The provision of Section 138 of the Electoral Act 2026 complements the provision of the Constitution, but is not in conflict with it. The court also refused to invalidate Section 77(5) of the Electoral Act, holding that the issue had already been settled by the Court of Appeal.