Enyimba have escaped sanction for fielding an ineligible player in last weekend's Nigeria Premier League fixture against Niger Tornadoes.
Enyimba beat Tornadoes 3-0, with one of their goals coming from midfielder Ikechukwu Ibenegbu, who should have been suspended after already accumulating five yellow cards over the course of the season.
But in adjudicating Tornadoes' protest, the LMC ruled that the result of the matchday 28 fixture would stand, as Tornadoes could not provide evidence to support the application of Rule C5.
"...suspension notices are sent to both clubs involved in any match in question in order for disputes over eligibility of players to be addressed prior to the match," read the LMC decision signed by CEO Saihu Abubakar.
"Note that where a protest is made against the eligibility of a player prior to a match and the other team insists on fielding such player, upon confirmation that the player was ineligible, it would likely be established that the team intentionally featured such a player as envisaged under Rule C5."
Tornadoes had filed a petition seeking to have three points and three goals awarded to the club on the grounds that Enyimba fielded Ibenegbu, who was suspended for the match following the accumulation of five yellow cards.
In their defense, Enyimba submitted that they did not intentionally field the player as the notice of suspension did not reach them. They also made references to similar incidents last season in which they alerted Nasarawa United in Makurdi that they were about to field a suspended Thomas Zenke and the player was dropped.
Similarly, in Port Harcourt last season, Kano Pillars brought to the attention of Enyimba that they were about to field a suspended Nzube Anaezemba, leading to Enyimba dropping him. They therefore contended that Tornadoes did not play fair by with-holding information only to turn to protest.
The LMC's finding was that Tornadoes failed to raise the protest either at the pre-match meeting or at any point prior to the commencement of the match, which would have established a case of intentionally fielding an ineligible player as envisaged under the relevant section of the rule.