The Nation Newspaper

Tag: Appeal court

  • Appeal Court adjourns for ruling in GTBank, Innoson suit

    THE Court of Appeal sitting in Enugu yesterday adjourned sine die for ruling in an application brought before it by Guaranty Trust Bank (GTBank) seeking to amend its motion of appeal against a judgment given by a Federal High Court, Awka against the bank.

    At the resumed hearing of the matter yesterday, counsel to GTBank Chief Wole Olanipekun (SAN) informed the court that the appellant (GTBank) had its notice of appeal against the judgment of the Federal High Court, Awka.

    Olanipekun informed the court that he would like to withdraw the application dated June 22, 2016 and sought the court to grant him leave to do so.

    The application for withdrawal of the motion seeking an extension of time to respond to the counter-affidavit filed by Innoson against the motion to amend the notice of appeal was opposed by counsel to Innoson Motors and Chief Innocent Chukwuma, Prof. Joseph Mbadugha.

    Arguing that the court does not have the jurisdiction to grant hearing to the appellants, Mbadugha maintained that the court should hold the balance between the contending rights of all parties.

    In maintaining this balance, he averred that the court should note that they (Innoson Motors) have a motion before the court challenging that the applicants cannot be allowed to move any applications before the court since they are yet to comply with a previous order of the court.

    He argued that by order 80 of the Supreme Court Rules, since the appellants appeal has been entered at the Supreme Court, the Court of Appeal lacks the right to adjudicate on it.

    Responding to Innoson’s argument, counsel to GTBank noted that Mbadugha’s positions were unconstitutional.

    He maintained that once an application for withdrawal has been made, the applicant can withdraw his application and such an application cannot be opposed.

    Maintaining that it was within the court’s jurisdiction to grant the leave being sought, Olanipekun argued that the right of appeal is a constitutional right that should not suffer any distraction or nuances of the respondent.

    Upholding Olanipekun’s argument, the court led by Justice Helen Ogunwumiju ruled that by the provision of the 1999 Constitution, an appellant has the right to withdraw its application.

    “The application hereby stands withdrawn and struck out,” she ruled.

    With the application withdrawn, Olanipekun moved a motion praying the court for leave to amend its notice of appeal dated January 28, 2015 challenging the order of the Federal High Court, Awka.

    This motion was again challenged by counsel to Innoson Motors, who argued that where an appeal has been entered at the Supreme Court as in the case at hand, the lower court (Court of Appeal) loses the right to entertain the matter in any sort.

    The only jurisdiction the lower court has, he argued, is to transmit all pending applications to the appellate court.

    Urging the court to disregard Innoson’s argument, GTBank’s counsel argued that what is before the Supreme Court is an appeal on an interlocutory application, which is totally different from the substantive suit being argued by the parties.

    “A respondent to an appeal does not have the locus standi to ask for a stay of proceedings. The only party that can ask for stay of execution is an appellant, who has an appeal,”, argued.

    The matter was adjourned for ruling on a date to be communicated to the parties in the suit.

     

     

     

  • Corruption: Cleric urges Nigerian leaders to emulate Justice Mustapha Akanbi

    An Islamic cleric has urged Nigerian leaders to emulate late former Appeal Court President, Justice Mustapha Akanbi for his uprightness and incorruptible nature, as panacea to the challenges militating against the growth and development of the country.

    The Abuja based cleric, Ustaz Abdulwahab Sharani, who made the urge Sunday evening in Kaduna, also tasked Muslims to use the remaining few days of holy month of Ramadan to pray intensively for peace and security to return across the country in the place of killings, herders/farmers clashes, kidnapping, cattle rustling, armed robbery and other criminal acts that ha held parts of the country hostage.

    Speaking at a 8th day fidau prayer for late pioneer chairman of Independent Corrupt Practices and Other Related Offences Commission (ICPC), Justice Mustapha Akanbi, organised by General Secretary of Textile Workers Union, Comrade Issa Aremu, Ustaz Sharani said Nigerian Muslims should constantly seek Allah’s blessings, because the blessings with Allah are in excess of humans needs.

    “Late Justice Mustapha Akanbi was an honest and just man who treats everybody equally. He would rather please an outsider than please a relation or family member.

    “Justice Akanbi was incorruptible and fair to everybody. Nigerian leaders should emulate and take after him by being just, fair and especially incorruptible, that is one way of regaining our lost glory as a people and as a country.

    Read Also: Cleric commends Ambode

    “Prayer is very important in life, Allah wants us to always beseech Him and He gets angry if we fail to seek His blessings. We should use the remaining days of Ramadan to pray for Allah’s abundant blessings, because His blessings is more than what all the people on earth needs.

    “As I was about to leave Abuja for Kaduna this afternoon, I was feeling somehow about the trip, so I asked my Islamiyya students to pray and we all prayed. The importance of the prayer was that upon entering Kaduna, I was involved in a small accident. The prayer warded off evil and minimised the impact of the accident. So, we need to constantly pray.

    “But my initial fear was the spate of kidnappings along the Abuja-Kaduna road, how to avoid the kidnappers. Let us pray intensely for God to remove evil from this country and grant us peace and security.

    “The Muslims should pray in the last days of Ramadan for Allah to bring an end to insecurity in the country and bring lasting peace to Nigeria.

    “Ramadan is like a cleansing period for Muslims to cleanse them of all their sins, grant them forgiveness and shower them with more blessings than they ask for.”

  • Appeal Court acquits Oluwa of Lagos aspirant of forgery, conspiracy

    A Lagos High Court has quashed a verdict, which convicted an aspirant to the title of Oluwa of Lagos title, Prince Shamsondeen Akibo Oluwa, and three others of conspiracy and forgery.

    Justice Modupe Nicol-Clay upheld the argument of the appellants’ counsel Mr Akin Elegbede, that Chief Magistrate A.A. Adesanya erred in convicting his clients.

    Chief Magistrate Adesanya on August 5, 2015 convicted Oluwa, Ismaila Abayomi Oluwa, Tajudeen Ototo Oluwa and Muse Adegboyega Oluwa of forging Lagos State High Court official stamp and the registrar’s signature on a public notice published in The Punch of March 5, 2013.

    Dissatisfied with the judgment, the defendants filed an appeal before Justice Nicol-Clay, stating that the lower court was wrong in convicting them.

    Elegbede argued that the appellants were consistent in their oral testimony in denying knowledge of the public notice and its publication in the newspaper.

    He said there was no eyewitness account that the appellants were the authors or makers of the public notice nor that they personally pasted the public notice anywhere or that they were sighted on March 5, 2013 when the offence of conspiracy was alleged to have been committed.

    Elegbede submitted further that the trial Chief Magistrate was wrong to have relied on appellants’ statements as if they were confessional statements.

    He argued that what the appellants admitted in their statements was that they were parties to the public notice and the publication to the extent that their names were listed as parties in suit no: ID/1420/2010 (Prince Ismaila Abayomi Oluwa and others Vs Mukaila Kolawole Oluwa) relating to Oluwa of Lagos appointment and that the interlocutory injunction captured in the public notice was made by Justice Ibironke O. Harrison of the High Court of Lagos State on February 21, 2013.

    In her verdict, Justice Nicol-Clay noted that the failure of the prosecution to call Mrs. A. Akinola, a Registrar of the High Court whose name and signature appeared on the public notice was very fatal to prosecution’s case.

    Justice Nicol-Clay held that: “Consequently, there was no iota of evidence of forgery of the official stamp of the High Court and signature of Adeniyi Ezekiel Shola (ACR) in the public notice.

    “Having carefully considered the respective submissions of both learned counsel, it is my view that the offence of conspiracy by its nature is often proved by circumstantial evidence, it is seldomly or rarely proved by direct evidence.

    “The publication is said to be undated and unsigned. In the eyes of the law, such an undated and unsigned document has no probative value, no evidence value in law. It was not signed by the appellants and one of them, Muse Adegboyega Oluwa, is not listed in it.

    “I find myself to be in agreement with the submission of the learned counsel to the appellant that lifting of the genuine stamp or genuine signature of Adeniyi Ezekiel Shola into the public notice is not tantamount to forgery. The proper order to make would be to grant this application, the judgment of the trial judge is hereby set aside, the appellants are hereby discharged and acquitted on counts 1 and 2 of the criminal charge of conspiracy and forgery,” Justice Nicol-Clay held.

  • Appeal Court acquits Oluwa of Lagos aspirant of forgery, conspiracy

    A Lagos High Court has quashed a   verdict, which convicted an aspirant to the title of  Oluwa of Lagos title, Prince Shamsondeen Akibo Oluwa, and three others of  conspiracy and forgery.

    Justice Modupe Nicol-Clay upheld the argument of the appellants’ counsel  Mr Akin Elegbede, that Chief Magistrate A.A. Adesanya erred in conivicting his clients.

    Chief Magistrate Adesanya  on August 5, 2015 convicted Oluwa, Ismaila Abayomi Oluwa, Tajudeen Ototo Oluwa and Muse Adegboyega Oluwa of  forging  Lagos State High Court official stamp and the registrar’s signature on a public notice published in The Punch of March 5, 2013.

    Dissatisfied with the judgment, the defendants filed an appeal  before Justice Nicol-Clay, stating that the lower court was wrong in convicting them.

    Elegbede argued that the appellants were consistent in their oral testimony in denying knowledge of the public notice and its publication in the newspaper.

    He said none of the prosecution witnesses gave eyewitness account to the effect that the appellants were the authors or makers of the public notice.

    Besides, he said there was no eyewitness account that they personally pasted the public notice anywhere or that they were sighted on March 5, 2013 when the offence of conspiracy was alleged to have been committed.

    Elegbede  submitted further that the trial Chief Magistrate was wrong to have relied on appellants’ statements  as if they were confessional statements.

    He argued that what the appellants admitted in their statements was that they were parties to the public notice and the publication to the extent that their names were listed as parties in suit no: ID/1420/2010 (Prince Ismaila Abayomi Oluwa and others Vs Mukaila Kolawole Oluwa) relating to Oluwa of Lagos appointment and that the interlocutory injunction captured in the public notice was made by Justice Ibironke O. Harrison of the High Court of Lagos State on February 21, 2013.

    In her verdict, Justice Nicol-Clay noted that it was the contention of the prosecution that it was the official stamp of the High Court of Lagos State and the signature of the Principal Registrar of the High Court of Lagos State, which were forged and smuggled into the public notice.

    The court, therefore, referred to the evidence of the third prosecution witness, Adeniyi Ezekiel Shola, An Assistant Chief Registrar (ACR), Litigation, Lagos High Court that the signature and official stamp of the High Court were not forged but “lifted” or “smuggled into the public notice.

    The court said the failure of the prosecution  to call Mrs. A. Akinola, a Registrar of the High Court whose name and signature appeared on the public notice was very fatal to prosecution’s case.

    Justice Nicol-Clay held that: “Consequently, there was no iota of evidence of forgery of the official stamp of the High Court and signature of Adeniyi Ezekiel Shola (ACR) in the public notice.

    “Having carefully considered the respective submissions of both learned counsel, it is my view that the offence of conspiracy by its nature is often proved by circumstantial evidence, it is seldomly or rarely  proved by direct evidence.

    “The publication is said to be undated and unsigned. In the eyes of the law, such an undated and unsigned document has no probative value, no evidence value in law. It was not signed by the appellants and one of them, Muse Adegboyega Oluwa, is not listed in it.

    “I find myself to be in agreement with the submission of the learned counsel to the appellant that lifting of the genuine stamp or genuine signature of Adeniyi Ezekiel Shola into the public notice is not tantamount to forgery.

    “The proper order to make would be to grant this application, the judgment of the trial judge is hereby set aside, the appellants are hereby discharged and acquitted on counts  1 and 2 of the criminal charge of conspiracy and forgery,”Justice Nicol-Clay held.

     

  • Andrew Yakubu’s $9.7m stands forfeited to FG—Appeal Court

    The Kaduna Division of the Court of Appeal yesterday affirmed the decision of the Federal High Court, Kano, which ordered the interim forfeiture of the $9.7million cash  found in a house in Kaduna belonging to former Group Managing Director of NNPC, Engineer Andrew Yakubu.

    On 3 February, 2017, operatives of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission stormed the house and uncovered the sum and another £74,000 (Seventy Four Thousand Pounds Sterling) stashed in a fireproof safe.

    The money according to Yakubu, were gifts from well wishers.

    However the Commission suspected that the money was a proceed of crime and that prompted the EFCC to secure an interim forfeiture from the Federal High Court on the money.

    Yakubu through his counsel Ahmed Raji (SAN) approached the Federal High Court in Kano asking the court to revoke the order.

    The Federal High Court Kano presided over by Justice Z.B Abubakar on  10 May, 2017 dismissed the application of Yakubu and affirmed the order of interim forfeiture it granted on the 13th February,  2017.

    Yakubu being dissatisfied with decision of the Federal High Court, approached the court of appeal in a  bid to reverse the interim forfeiture order and get his money back.

    The appeal was filed on the 22nd of May, 2017 while the Commission filed its response which was subsequently adopted on the 29th of January 2018 and matter was then adjourned to today for judgment.

    The appeal was brought on grounds of jurisdiction, misrepresentation of fact by EFCC that the money was suspected to be proceeds of illegal activities.

    He further argued that Section  29 of the EFCC Establishment Act is null and void while at the same time submitted that, Section 28 of the EFCC Act offends the provision of Section 44 (2)(k). In Section 43 of the EFCC Establishment Act.

    Counsel to the plaintiff  argued that the Attorney General of the Federation did not make regulations and guidelines consequently, all forfeiture made shall be null and void.

    However, the respondents in their reply contended that the ruling of the lower court validating its order was not perverse and that sections 28 and 29 of EFCC Act are valid and operational notwithstanding the alleged failure of the AGF to make regulations for their operations.

    In yesterday’s ruling, Justice Obietonbara  Daniel  Kalio who headed the panel of the three judges of the appeal court resolved all the issues in favour of EFCC.

  • Court freezes Ekiti governor’s accounts

    •Judges quash high court verdict

    THE Court of Appeal yesterday froze two Ekiti Bank accounts belonging to Ekiti State Governor Ayo Fayose.

    The court gave the order at the instamce of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC, which argued that they were used to keep proceeds of crime.

    The three-man panel, led Justice Joseph Shagbaor Ikyegh, allowed the EFCC’s appeal and upturned the judgment of the Federal High Court, Ado-Ekiti, which was delivered about 16 months ago.

    Other members of the panel are Justice Boloukurumo Moses Ugo and Justice Mohammed Mustapha.

    The judgment of the lower court, which unblocked the accounts, was delivered by Justice Taiwo Taiwo on December 13, 2016.

    Fayose withdrew N5 million from one of the accounts immediately and transferred the sum of N75 million to his lawyer, Chief Mike Ozekhome (SAN).

    Dissatisfied with the Ado-Ekiti Federal High Court’s verdict, the EFCC filed an appeal at the appellate court on three grounds.

    The anti-graft agency contended that the immunity enjoyed by the governor did not preclude his account from being frozen.

    The Appeal Court allowed the appeal and held that Fayose’s accounts, which were unblocked by the Federal High Court, be frozen.

    The court delivered the judgment upon reading the record of the appeal and after hearing EFCC’s counsel, Mr. Rotimi Oyedepo, Fayose’s counsel, Mike Ozekhome and Zenith Bank’s counsel, Mr. Oluwasegun Ayinde.

    Justice Ikyegh ordered “that the appeal is meritorious and, having resolved all three issues agitated in the appeal in appellant’s (EFCC’s) favour.

    “That the appeal is hereby allowed; that the judgment delivered by Justice Taiwo Taiwo of the Federal High Court, Ekiti Judicial Division, on the 13th day of December, 2016, granting the claims of the 1st respondent in Suit No: FHC/AD/CS/27/2016 is hereby set aside.”

    The two accounts had earlier been frozen by Justice Mohammed Shuaibu of Federal High Court, Lagos in an ex-parte motion brought by the EFCC.

     

     

  • Appeal Court upturns Ekiti businessman’s imprisonment

    The Court of Appeal in Ado-Ekiti, Ekiti State, has upturned a one-year imprisonment passed on a prominent businessman in Ado-Ekiti, Alhaji Azeez Apenpe, for allegedly giving false information to the police.

    The Magistrates’ Court and High Court had convicted Apenpe of the charge preferred against him by the police after he had reported a case of theft on his farm.

    The three-member appeal panel in a judgment delivered yesterday by Justice Ahmad Belgore set aside the verdicts of the two lower courts

    and resolved all issues in favour of the appellant (Apenpe).

    Describing the trial and conviction of the appellant by the lower courts as a nullity, the Appeal Court discharged and acquitted him.

    Seventy-five-year-old Apenpe is a popular printer and politician.

    The appellant had reported Sunday Akoe and his family to the police for allegedly stealing yams on his farm and destroying it in the process.

    Apenpe had in his statement of claim averred that the police turned him (the complainant) to an accused person, arraigning him at a

    Magistrates’ Court, accusing him of giving false information.

    The court, in arriving at its judgment, held that the appellant’s statement written at the police station could not be found.

    He was subsequently sentenced to a one-year imprisonment and given the option of N5,000 fine, which he paid.

    Apenpe took the case to the High Court, which also affirmed the one-year imprisonment sentence handed down by the Magistrates’ Court.

    Counsel to the appellant, Mr. Magnus Ejelonu, argued that the two lower courts lacked jurisdiction to hear the case, but the Federal High Court.

    Ejelonu said: “His statement at the police station that was missing should be resolved in his favour.

    “The two lower courts refusing to take his plea was to also be resolved in his favour.”

     

  • Kano to get Appeal Court

    The Federal Government will establish an Appeal Court division in Kano State, President of the Appeal Court, Justice Zainab Bulkachuwa, has said.

    Justice Bulkachuwa, who addressed reporters yesterday, said Kano deserved to have an Appeal Court division as majority of the cases being handled at the Kaduna State division of the Appeal Court were from Kano.

    She said: “This shows that the people of Kano know their rights. Once the state meets the requirements, a division of the Appeal Court would be established.

    “The problem we have is that we don’t have enough judges. Presently we have less than 90 Appeal Court judges in the whole country. They are grossly inadequate to treat the cases we have on ground. Going by the requirement, Nigeria is expected to have at least 90 Appeal Court judges, but we have less than that.”

    Justice Bulkachuwa led six other judges to the state to treat 285 pending cases between today and tomorrow.

    She explained that they came from Jigawa State, saying they would move to Katsina State after leaving Kano.

    Acting Chief Judge of the State, Justice Nura Sagir, said Kano State deserves to have a division of Appeal Court because it was difficult going to Kaduna State for cases.

    According to him, Kano had 85 Magistrate Courts; 120 Shari’ah Courts and 20 High Courts.

    The Attorney-General, Ibrahim Mukhtar, promised that the government would give all necessary support for the establishment of the Appeal Court.

     

  • Supreme Court reverses sack of Appeal Court’s Chief Registrar

    Supreme Court reverses sack of Appeal Court’s Chief Registrar

    •Justices order his reinstatement

    The Supreme Court has reversed the 2009 decision by the Federal Judicial Service Commission (FJSC) compulsorily retiring the Chief Registrar of the Court of Appeal, Bode Thomas.

    Thomas was compulsorily retired on March 5, 2009 after the FJSC accepted the report of its investigative committee, which examined allegations of “serious misconduct” raised against him in a complaint by the then President of the Court of Appeal Justice Umaru Abdullahi.

    A five-man panel of the Supreme Court, in a unanimous judgment on February 16 this year, faulted the process leading to the FJSC’s decision to compulsorily retire Thomas. The court said the FJSC breached the principles of fair hearing in its handling of the case.

    Justice Abdullahi had, by a letter dated November 24, 2008, laid a complaint against Thomas before the FJSC, which he accused the then chief registrar of insubordination and sundry misconducts.

    By a letter dated March 5, 2009, FJSC’s Secretary, Hajia B. A. Bashir, informed Thomas that the commission accepted the report of the committee it constituted to investigate the allegations against him and recommended his compulsory retirement in line with Regulation 43(2)(a) of the FJSC Regulations.

    Thomas challenged the FSJC’s decision at the Federal High Court via a suit, which he filed on May 27, 2009. In its judgment on May 12, 2011, the Federal High Court, among others, voided Thomas’ sack and ordered his reinstatement, a decision the FJSC challenged at the Court of Appeal.

    In its judgment on January 16, 2013, the Court of Appeal upheld the FJSC’s appeal and set aside the judgment of the Federal High Court, forcing Thomas to appeal to the Supreme Court.

    Justice Kumai Akaahs, in the lead judgment, faulted the judgment of the Court of Appeal, which he noted, was based on irrelevant evidence on which pleadings were not led at the trial court.

    Justice Akaahs said: “The appeal (at the Court of Appeal) was decided on the issue of admission made by the plaintiff (Thomas) on which there was no pleading. The evidence went to no issue. The evidence has no relevance and should be expunged from the records.”

    He said the important question relevant to the resolution of the appeal was the determination of whether the process leading to Thomas’ retirement breached the principles of fair hearing as argued by the appellant.

    Justice Akaahs, after a thorough analysis of parties’ arguments, held that it could not be said that the principles of fair hearing was not breached, where Justice Abdullahi, who was the complainant, also participated in the disciplinary proceedings leading to the FJSC’s decision to retire Thomas.

    He upheld Thomas’ argument that the participation of the President of the Court of Appeal in the FJSC’s disciplinary proceedings, where he (Justice Abdullahi) was also the accuser, breached the principles of fair hearing.

    Justice Akaahs said the Court of Appeal was in grave error when it held that no prejudice or miscarriage of justice was proved by the appellant such as would vitiate the proceedings that led to appellant’s compulsory retirement.

    He said: “I have already disposed of issue one and any arguments relating to admissions made by the appellant on giving approval to staff to undertake foreign trips and the recruitment of junior staff without the approval of the President, Court of Appeal cannot be used to justify the claim that the appellant was granted fair hearing.

    “In view of all that transpired and especially based on the fact that the President, Court of Appeal had made up his mind, when he wrote to the Secretary of the FJSC on 24th November 2008, that he could no longer work with the appellant as Chief Registrar of the Court of Appeal and requested that an appropriate disciplinary action be taken against him.

    “It is obvious that the appellant did not stand a chance of getting any verdict from the commission (FJSC) other than the one which was recommended by the investigating committee. In other words, the commission was to merely rubber stamp what the committee had recommended.

    “Most of the members of the committee were among those who sat in the commission to approve the recommendations.

    “In conclusion, the appeal succeeds in the main. The proceedings of the committee, together with the decision of the FJSC are hereby declared a nullity for failure to adhere strictly to the rules of natural justice.

    “The decision taken at the FJSC to compulsorily retire the appellant as Chief Registrar of the Court of Appeal since March 5, 2009 is hereby set aside. The appellant is reinstated to his post as Chief Registrar of the Court of Appeal with effect from the date of his compulsory retirement,” Justice Akaahs said.

    Justice Paul Galinje, in his contribution, expressed displeasure about the process leading to Thomas’s compulsory retirement. He noted that it was wrong for Justice Abdullahi (who was the accuser) and members of the investigative committee to participated in the FJSC’s meeting, where the investigation report was adopted.

    Justices Musa Dattijo Muhammad, Amina Adamu Augie and Sidi Dauda Bage, who were also on the panel, agreed with the lead judgment.

  • Appeal court: Nigerians can’t pursue Shell spill claim in U.K.

    Appeal court: Nigerians can’t pursue Shell spill claim in U.K.

    The Court of Appeal in London ruled yesterday that two Niger Delta communities cannot pursue Royal Dutch Shell in English courts over oil spills in their regions.

    The split decision upheld a High Court ruling in 2017 that was a setback to attempts to hold British multinationals liable at home for their subsidiaries’ actions abroad.

    The court rejected the appeal from a law firm, Leigh Day, on behalf of Bille and Ogale communities.

    It upheld a ruling that English courts did not have jurisdiction over claims against Shell’s Nigerian subsidiary Shell Petroleum Development Company (SPDC).

    SPDC is jointly operated with the Federal Government.

    Shell said the court “rightly upheld” the earlier ruling, adding that Nigeria’s “well-developed justice system” was the correct place for the claims.

    Leigh Day said the two communities intended to bring the case to Britain’s Supreme Court.

    “We are hopeful that the Supreme Court will grant permission to appeal and will come to a different view,” Leigh Day partner Daniel Leader said.