The Nation Newspaper

Tag: Court

  • Court sentence siblings, house help to death for robbing woman, 87

    Court sentence siblings, house help to death for robbing woman, 87

    An Ekiti High Court sitting in Ado Ekiti, yesterday, sentenced two brothers and their female friend to death by hanging for robbing an 87-year-old woman of N147,000 and a watch.

    The convicts, Shadrack Apos, 30, Lucky Akpos, 33, and a house help, Precious Adunola, 24 were arraigned before Justice Lekan Ogunmoye, on August 19, 2024, on two counts of conspiracy and armed robbery.

    The prosecution counsel, Kunle-Shina Adeyemo, told the court that the convicts committed the offences on June 12, 2024, at Ifaki Ekiti, while armed with a gun and wooden plank to rob Madam Victoria Folorunso of N147,000 and a wristwatch.

    In her testimony during the trial, Madam Folorunso said: “I was sleeping around 1am, when I suddenly saw two persons in my room. One pointed a gun at my forehead while the second person held a plank; they asked me to bring all the money I had in the house. They took the N100,000 I had under my bed and another N47,000 I kept in my underwear. They also took my wristwatch, presented to me by my children. They also took my phone, but they returned it to me.

    “When they threatened to shoot me, I told them I have N3 million in my account. They instructed me to withdraw the money the following day and give to Preciuos Adunola, my house help, to deliver it to them.

    Read Also: NEITI hails Nigeria for getting off FATF grey list

    “They were not masked, they did not break the door and were relating freely with my house help. They warned me not to tell anybody or else they would kidnap and kill me. They were calling and threatening me thereafter, for taking too long to send the money. I later informed my children about it and they told the police,” she concluded.

    Adeyemo called two witnesses and tendered defendant’s statements, search warrant, wooden gun among others as exhibits.

    While the defendants, represented by their lawyers, Oluwatoyin Marcus and Mitchel Aribisala, called one witness each.

    Delivering his judgment, Justice Ogunmoye said: “my earlier findings that the 3rd defendant, Adunola Precious must have opened the door to enable the robbers have seamless entry into the house she was sharing with the victim aptly demonstrated her own pivotal role in the plan to rob the victim.

    “From the believable evidence before the court therefore, it is clear that the prosecution had been able to establish that the defendants planned and agreed to rob the victim on June 12, 2024.

    “The charge of conspiracy and armed robbery has therefore been proved beyond reasonable doubt against the defendants and therefore they are found guilty and convicted as charged by this court.

    The 1st, 2nd and 3rd defendant are to be hanged by the neck until they are dead. May God have mercy on their souls,”  the Judge pronounced.

  • FCCPC: Court rulings uphold consumer rights

    FCCPC: Court rulings uphold consumer rights

    The Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (FCCPC) has welcomed recent court rulings that uphold consumer rights in Nigeria, notably the Lagos High Court’s award of ₦5 million in damages against Multichoice Nigeria Limited and the Enugu High Court’s decision declaring Peace Mass Transit’s no refund policy unlawful.

    In a statement by the Director, Corporate Affairs, Ondaje Ijagwu, the Executive Vice Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of the FCCPC, Mr. Tunji Bello commended the courts for ensuring fair outcomes that strengthen consumer confidence and accountability in the marketplace. 

    Bello said the judgments show the strength of the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Act (FCCPA), 2018, which empowers consumers to seek redress and requires service providers to meet lawful standards of fair service delivery.

    He also praised the consumers for using lawful channels to pursue justice rather than recourse to self-help. 

    He explained the law provides several ways for consumers to express their grievances and that these decisions confirm the courts’ willingness to protect consumer rights.

    According to Bello, between March and August 2025, the Commission facilitated recoveries of more than ₦10 billion for consumers across 30 sectors, demonstrating the growing effectiveness of Nigeria’s consumer protection system.

    “The consistent judicial enforcement complements the Commission’s regulatory work and reinforces the message that consumer-rights violations attract real consequences. He urged consumers to continue reporting unfair practices through the FCCPC complaint portal, email, or any of its offices nationwide”.

    In one of the two decided cases, the Lagos High Court, presided over by Justice R. O. Olukolu, awarded ₦5 million in general damages to a DStv subscriber, Mr. Ben Onuora, for the wrongful disconnection of his active subscription. 

    The Court found that Multichoice acted unlawfully by cutting off service despite verified payment, causing inconvenience to the claimant and his family. 

    In the second case, the Enugu High Court, under Justice C. O. Ajah, ruled that Peace Mass Transit’s no refund after payment policy was illegal and void under Sections 120, 104, and 129(1) of the FCCPA 2018.

     The company was ordered to pay ₦500,000 in damages to a passenger, Mr. Tochukwu Odo, whose fare was withheld after an uncompleted trip. The Court held that service providers must refund consumers when a service is not rendered and that policies denying refunds breach statutory consumer rights.

    Bello noted that the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (FCCPC) is Nigeria’s primary agency for consumer protection and competition regulation under the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Act, 2018. The Commission promotes fair markets, safeguards consumer rights, and ensures accountability across all sectors.

  • Court orders bank to take over firm

    Court orders bank to take over firm

    Justice Deinde Isaac Dipeolu of the Federal High Court in Lagos has granted the request of Lotus Bank Limited to take over the properties — both movable and immovable — belonging to Unpacked Limited (now in receivership).

    The company is owned by Oluwafeyikemi Abudu and guaranteed by Oluwafemi Badewole.

    The judge issued the order allowing the bank to take possession of the company’s assets and monies held in various banks while granting an ex parte motion marked FHC/L/CS/2097/2025, filed and moved by the bank’s counsel, A. Adedoyin-Adetunji.

    The lawyer informed the court that it was brought pursuant to Section 6(6) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended), Sections 554 and 556(1–4) of the Companies and Allied Matters Act (CAMA) 2020, and under the court’s inherent jurisdiction.

    The motion sought several interim orders, including an injunction restraining a long list of financial institutions — among them Guaranty Trust Bank, Access Bank, First Bank, Zenith Bank, UBA, and others — from releasing or dealing with any funds or assets belonging to the defendants. The order covers all accounts linked to the BVNs 22300683147 (second defendant) and 22141834308 (third defendant) up to the amount of N32,691,920.86, being the alleged indebtedness arising from an Ijara Muntaluya bittamleek (lease-to-own) facility granted to the first defendant and guaranteed by the second and third defendants.

    The bank also sought an interim order empowering the second plaintiff — appointed pursuant to Clause 7(b) of the Deed of All Assets Debenture dated May 25, 2025, and the Deed of Appointment of Receiver dated October 6, 2025 — to perform his duties as receiver/manager pending the determination of the motion on notice.

    READ ALSO: Why I initially regretted relocating to America – Teju Babyface

    Other reliefs included an order directing the receiver/manager to take necessary steps to realise the company’s fixed and floating assets, as stated in the Debenture Deed, and an order mandating the Inspector-General of Police and other law enforcement officers to assist in securing the company’s assets located at VPD Academy Building 4, Thorburn Avenue, Yaba, Lagos. The court also authorised bailiffs to force open any gates or doors obstructing access to the property.

    Additionally, the court granted leave for substituted service of the orders and all court processes by pasting them at the last known addresses of the second defendant at Number 5B Onilegbale Road, Ikoyi, and the third defendant at Number 1 Charles Ifeanyi Street, Off Adebayo Doherty, Lekki Phase 1, Lagos.

    The ex parte motion was supported by an affidavit deposed to by Patrick Mgbeoma, the receiver/manager and second plaintiff in the suit, alongside a written address and several documentary exhibits. The bank also undertook to pay damages if it is later found that the orders ought not to have been granted.

    After hearing counsel’s submission, Justice Dipeolu granted the orders as prayed and adjourned the matter to October 31, 2025, for the hearing of the substantive suit.

  • Court restrains factional NMA executive in Enugu

    Court restrains factional NMA executive in Enugu

    The Enugu State High Court, presided over by Hon. Justice C. A. Ogbuabor (PhD), has granted an ex-parte order in favour of some members of the Nigeria Medical Association (NMA), Enugu State Branch, restraining a faction of the association from parading themselves as the state executives of the body.

    The interim order, issued on Monday, October 20, 2025, followed a motion ex-parte filed by four senior medical practitioners—Dr. Sunday Okafor, Dr. Chima Edeoga, Emeritus Prof. Samuel Ohaegbunam, and Dr. Grace Bernard-Asdu—on behalf of members of the NMA Enugu State Branch, excluding those with “adverse interests” in the matter.

    Read Also: CBN lists benefits of Nigeria exiting FATF grey list

    The defendants in the suit include Prof. Bala Audu, Dr. Ben Egbo, Dr. Benjamin Olowojebututu, Dr. Ushakuma Anenga, Dr. Wale Lasisi, Dr. Harrison Omokhua, Dr. Bature Mannir, the Incorporated Trustees of the NMA, and others allegedly parading themselves as executives of the association in Enugu State.

    The motion, brought pursuant to Order 7 Rule 5 and Order 39 Rule 1 of the Enugu State High Court Rules, 2020, and under the court’s inherent jurisdiction, was supported by a 22-paragraph affidavit deposed to by Dr. Okafor. The plaintiffs attached several exhibits (A–G) and a written address to substantiate their claims.

    After hearing the submissions of counsel to the applicants, Mr. Ndubuisi Okwesili, and considering the affidavit, exhibits, and other court filings, Justice Ogbuabor held that the depositions revealed a “compelling need” to grant the application.

  • Court restrains factional NMA executives in Enugu

    Court restrains factional NMA executives in Enugu

    The Enugu State High Court, presided over by Hon. Justice C. A. Ogbuabor (PhD), has granted an ex-parte order in favour of some members of the Nigeria Medical Association (NMA), Enugu State branch, restraining a faction of the association from parading themselves as the state executives of the body.

    The interim order, issued on Monday, October 20, 2025, followed a motion ex-parte filed by four senior medical practitioners—Dr. Sunday Okafor, Dr. Chima Edeoga, Emeritus Prof. Samuel Ohaegbunam, and Dr. Grace Bernard-Asdu—on behalf of members of the NMA Enugu State Branch, excluding those with “adverse interests” in the matter.

    The defendants in the suit include Prof. Bala Audu, Dr. Ben Egbo, Dr. Benjamin Olowojebututu, Dr. Ushakuma Anenga, Dr. Wale Lasisi, Dr. Harrison Omokhua, Dr. Bature Mannir, the Incorporated Trustees of the NMA, and others allegedly parading themselves as executives of the association in Enugu State.

    Read Also: Enugu CJ frees 86 inmates

    The motion, brought pursuant to Order 7 Rule 5 and Order 39 Rule 1 of the Enugu State High Court Rules, 2020, and under the court’s inherent jurisdiction, was supported by a 22-paragraph affidavit deposed to by Dr. Okafor. The plaintiffs attached several exhibits (A–G) and a written address to substantiate their claims.

    After hearing the submissions of counsel to the applicants, Mr. Ndubuisi Okwesili, and considering the affidavit, exhibits, and other court filings, Justice Ogbuabor held that the depositions revealed a “compelling need” to grant the application.

    Although the details of the restraining order were not immediately available, the ruling effectively puts on hold the activities of the faction claiming to be the NMA Enugu State executive pending further hearing of the substantive suit (Suit No. E/1327/2025).

    The case is expected to return to court for further proceedings in the coming days.

  • Court rejects ‘terrorists’ negotiator’ Tukur’s third bail application

    Court rejects ‘terrorists’ negotiator’ Tukur’s third bail application

    • DSS’ investigator accuses defendant of betrayal

    A Federal High Court in Abuja has rejected a fresh application for bail filed by detained alleged terrorists’ negotiator, Tukur Mohammed Mamu.

    Justice Mohammed Umar, in a ruling yesterday, noted the health complaint made by Mamu and held that the detaining authority, the Department of State Services (DSS) should not release him, but take him to an appropriate health facility where he would be adequately attended to.

    Justice Umar noted that, by the history of the case so far, the prosecution has exhibited diligence in its handling of the case and has exhibited diligence in prosecuting the case.

    The judge said one of the reasons for granting bail is where the prosecution is not diligent, noting that since the prosecution in this case is diligent, the application for bail cannot be granted.

    He subsequently ordered that the defence lawyer should choose the health facility comfortable to the defendant, to which he should be promptly taken.

    He also asked the DSS to allow the defendant access to members of his family.

    The ruling is the third time the court will reject his application for bail since his was arraigned on March 21, 2023 by the Federal Government on a 10-count charge bordering on terrorism financing, among others.

    Mamu was arrested on September 7, 2022 by Egyptian security officials at the Cairo International Airport, on reasonable suspicion of financing Boko Haram terrorism activities.

    Read Also: UPDATED: Court rejects alleged terrorists negotiator Tukur Mamu’s third bail application

    He was alleged to have convinced the terrorists to discuss ransom payments with individual families of the hostages of the train attack instead of the Chief of Defense Staff Committee set up by the Federal Government for his personal financial gain.

    He was said to have been nominated by the terrorists that attacked the Abuja-Kaduna bound train sometime in March 2022 which took scores of persons hostage.

    Mamu was alleged to have collected ransoms on behalf of the Boko Haram terrorists from families of hostages, confirmed the amount and facilitated the delivery of same to the terrorists.

    After the ruling, a witness called by the prosecution, an Investigator with the DSS, whose identity was shielded, told the court how the committee set up by the Federal Government to negotiate the release of the Abuja-Kaduna train attack hostages in 2022 was allegedly betrayed by Mr Tukur Mamu.

    The DSS operative, who was led in evidence by the prosecuting lawyer, David Kaswe, said: “In 2022, March 28 to be precised, the Kaduna-bound train was attacked enroute to Kaduna. Several persons were killed and others were injured and over 60 people were taken into the bush as hostages. Thereafter, a committee which was already in existence, handling a similar cases of abduction, with government support was mandated to also explore measures for the release of the hostages. The committee was supervised by then Chief of Defence Staff (CDS), Gen. Lucky Irabor (rtd.). The committee established communication with the terrorists on the possibility of securing the release of the kidnapped hostages. And the terrorists made some demands which include the release of members of their families who were in custody of government detention facilities in exchange for the release of the hostages,” he said.

    The witness said while that was in progress, the terrorists consulted with some of the hostages in their custody and recommended names of persons who they felt could negotiate on their behalf with the government.

    “Names were suggested and the suggested names were forwarded to the people suggested, seeking their willingness to accept in the negotiation on behalf of the terrorist group

    “All those that were contacted declined to take the offer except the defendant who offered himself to negotiate on behalf of the terrorists group with the government.

    “Thereafter, as earlier stated, window of communication was already established between the government recognised committee and the terrorists.

    “So when the defendant came onboard, communication was taken place on multiple fronts at the same time, that is apart from the committee.”

    According to him, after sometime, the defendant (Mamu) expressed his dissatisfaction with the arrangement where communication was taking place on multiple fronts.

    “The defendant, having been accepted to negotiate on their behalf with government, suggested or advised the terrorists to appoint a single interlocutor or negotiator,” he said.

    The witness said Mamu then became the only negotiator between the terror group and the government committee. 

    “So when the defendant emerged as sole interlocutor between the terrorists group and government, attempts by the committee members to reach out to the terrorists became a challenge, because they do not want to reach out to the committee anymore except through the defendant.

    “Subsequently in order to continue with the government’s assignment, the committee now continues to recognise the defendant,” he said.

  • Court orders estate to hand over flat to owner

    Court orders estate to hand over flat to owner

    Lagos State High Court in Tafawa Balewa Square has ordered Horizon Estate, a subsidiary of Lekki Gardens Estate, to hand over a four-bedroom maisonette (MT5A) at Cyberville Estate, Lekki, to a subscriber, Mrs. Omesham Patience Mbanuzuo.

    Justice Akingbola George granted a perpetual injunction restraining the firm — also known as Horizon Paradise Limited — either by itself or its agents, from making further demands on Mrs. Mbanuzuo regarding any alleged outstanding payment for the property.

    Justice George further issued another injunction restraining the company from interfering with the claimant’s quiet and peaceful possession and enjoyment of the four-bedroom maisonette (MT5A) at Cyberville Estate, Lekki. The court also ordered the company to pay Mrs. Mbanuzuo N1 million as costs.

    The court declared that the claimant had discharged her obligations under the contract for the off-plan purchase of the four-bedroom maisonette, which the defendant completed over two years after the agreed construction and handover date.

    Justice George made the orders while ruling in Suit LD/3536LM/2025 filed by Mrs. Mbanuzuo against Horizon Estate.

    Mrs. Mbanuzuo, through her counsel, Mr. Pius Sodje, sued the company for failure to hand over the property she paid for and sought the reliefs that were eventually granted by the court.

    The real estate firm, represented by its counsel, Mr. Theophilus Ozumor, filed a counter-affidavit and urged the court to dismiss the suit with costs.

    Read Also: Over 8m Nigerians complete pre-online registration – INEC

    After reviewing all submissions, affidavits, and cited authorities, Justice George upheld all arguments advanced by the claimant’s lawyer and dismissed the defendant’s preliminary objection and counter-affidavit.

    In granting judgment in favour of the claimant, Justice George held:

    “From the evidence before the court, I resolve the issues in favour of the claimant and enter judgment as follows: A declaration that the claimant has fully discharged her obligations in the off-plan purchase of the four-bedroom maisonette (MT5A) at Cyberville Estate, which the defendant completed more than two years after the agreed construction and handover date.

    “An order directing the defendant to immediately hand over the four-bedroom maisonette (MT5A) to the claimant.

    “A perpetual injunction restraining the defendant, by itself or its privies, from making further demands regarding any outstanding payment on the property.

    “A perpetual injunction restraining the defendant from interfering with the claimant’s quiet and peaceful possession and enjoyment of the property. The defendant shall pay N1million as costs to the claimant.”

  • JUST IN: Court rejects alleged terrorists negotiator Tukur Mamu’s third bail application

    JUST IN: Court rejects alleged terrorists negotiator Tukur Mamu’s third bail application

    A Federal High Court in Abuja has rejected a fresh application for bail filed by detained alleged terrorists negotiator, Tukur Mohammed Mamu.

    Justice Mohammed Umar, in a ruling on Wednesday, noted the health complaint by Mamu and  held that the detaining authority, the Department of State Services (DSS) should not release him but take him to an appropriate health facility where he would be adequately attended to.

    Justice Umar noted that, by the history of the case so far, the prosecution has exhibited diligence in it handling of the case and exhibited diligence in prosecuting the case.

    The judge said one of the reasons for granting bail is where the prosecution is not diligent, noting that since the prosecution in this case is diligent, the application for bail cannot be granted.

    He subsequently ordered that the defence lawyer should choose the  health facility comfortable to the defendant, to which he should be promptly taken.

    He also asked the DSS to allow the defendant access to members of his family.

    The ruling on Wednesday is the third time the court will reject his application for bail since his was arraigned on March 21, 2023 by the Federal Government on a 10-count charge bordering on terrorism financing, among others.

    Mamu was arrested on September 7, 2022 by Egyptian security officials at the Cairo International Airport, on reasonable suspicion of financing Boko Haram terrorism activities.

     He was alleged to have convinced the terrorists to discuss ransom payments with individual families of the hostages of the train attack instead of the Chief of Defense Staff Committee set up by the Federal Government for his personal financial gain. 

    He was said to have been nominated by the terrorists that attacked the Abuja-Kaduna bound train sometime in March 2022 which took scores of persons hostage.

    Mamu was alleged to have collected ransoms on behalf of the Boko Haram terrorists from families of hostages, confirmed the amount and facilitated the delivery of same to the terrorists. 

  • Court orders MDCN Registrar to relist barred doctor

    Court orders MDCN Registrar to relist barred doctor

    A Federal High Court in Abuja has ordered the Registrar of the Medical and Dental Council of Nigeria (MDCN) to forthwith relist Dr. Sunday O Elusoji’s name in the register of medical and dental practitioners in Nigeria.

    The court also ordered the MDCN to communicate forthwith the relisting of Dr. Elusoji’s name in the register of medical and dental practitioners in Nigeria to the University of Benin Teaching Hospital, the Edo State Ministry of Health, Benin, and the Federal Ministry of Health, Abuja.

    It declared that in line with Section 16 (4) & (7) of the Medical and Dental Practitioners Act (MDPA) and the judgment and order of the Court of Appeal, which set aside the April 8, 2021 direction of the Medical and Dental Disciplinary Tribunal (MDDT), Dr. Elusoji is free to practice as a medical practitioner in the country.

    Read Also: Nigeria has no reason to be poor, says Tinubu

    The court further declared that in line with Section 16 (4) & (7) of the MDPA and the Court of Appeal judgment, the six-month suspension from medical practice handed Dr. Elusoji by the Appeal Court in its October 27, 2022 judgment, expired on October 8, 2021.

    Justice Obioma Egwuatu issued the orders and declarations in a judgment he delivered on April 10, 2025, in a suit filed by Dr. Elusoji against the Chairman, Medical and Dental Practitioners Disciplinary Tribunal (MDPDT) and the MDCN.

    Justice Egwuatu held that as against the claim by the Chairman of the MDPDT (listed as the sole respondent in the appeal court judgment) no valid appeal was pending at the Supreme Court against the October 27, 2022, judgment of the Court of Appeal.

    The suit before the Federal High Court was filed by Dr. Elusoji through his lawyer, Ikechukwu Emery, following the failure of the MDCN to comply with the Court of Appeal, Abuja, delivered on October 27, 2022, in the appeal which set aside the direction (decision) of the MDPDT issued on April 8, 2021.

    Dr. Elusoji, a Consultant Surgeon and a professor at the University of Benin Teaching Hospital (UBTH), Benin City, Edo State, was, sometime in 2021, convicted by the MDPDT.

    The MDPDT had his name struck off its register for allegedly conducting himself infamously while attending to a patient, Mr. Uwa Osagie, at his private health facility, Our Medical Centre (aka Our Hospital) at Number 2, Jemila Road, Ikpoba Hill, Benin City.

    Upon an appeal, the Court of Appeal, in its judgment of October 27, 2022, set aside the sentence the MDPDT imposed on Dr. Elusoji and instead ordered that he (Dr. Elusoji) be suspended from practice as a medical practitioner for a period of six months with effect from the date of the MDPDT’s decision – April 8, 2021.

    Following the Court of Appeal judgment, Dr. Elusoji communicated the appellate’s decision to the MDCN, demanding, among others, that his name be relisted, a request the MDCN failed to comply with, prompting him to file the suit before the Federal High Court.

  • Court hears breach of contract suit on November 10

    Court hears breach of contract suit on November 10

    Lagos State High Court at TBS has fixed November 10 for hearing in an alleged breach of contract suit filed against real estate firm, DNJ Properties and Investment by one of its subscribers.

    Subscriber, Olufemi Odiri, through his lawyer, Ademola Adefolaju, sued the firm in LD/ADR/5956/2025 for alleged failure to deliver a property paid for, despite demands.

    Justice Tunde Bashiru fixed the date after claimant’s counsel told the court the defendant had been served with court processes but yet to respond.

    The judge adjourned and ordered that a hearing notice be issued to DNJ Properties.

    Odiri is seeking a declaration that under the Contract of Sale between the claimant and defendant, the defendant is obliged to allocate one unit of a two bedrooms on plots 14/16, Eru Ifa Street, Ikate, Lekki, having received full payment.

    He is praying for an order compelling the defendant to allocate the apartment to him as stipulated in the agreement.

    Read Also: Nigeria finalises partnership with World’s largest solar panel production company

    Alternatively, the plaintiff seeks an order directing the defendant to pay N200 million, representing the market value of the apartment; N5 million as cost of prosecuting the suit, pre-judgment interest of 21 per cent per annum until judgment and post-judgment interest of 19 per cent per annum until final payment.

    In his statement of claim, Odiri said DNJ entered into a Joint Venture Agreement with Michael Oniyitan, original owner of the land, to develop 13 units of two bedrooms, two units of three bedrooms with BQ, and two maisonettes.

    He claimed that in 2023, he was introduced to the project by Kolawole Olorode and Niyi Olaniyanu, and was assured approvals had been obtained.

    Based on this, he subscribed to one unit for N50 million, paid in full into DNJ Properties’ account at FCMB.

    However, Odiri alleged that as of March, the firm had yet to begin construction.

    He said he found that the company had put up the land for sale, contrary to agreement.

    The claimant contends that the defendant intends to dispose of the property.

    He argued that by the principle of nemo dat quod non habet (no one gives what they do not have), the defendant had no legal right to collect money for a non-existent property.

    Odiri claimed he has suffered psychological and emotional trauma as a result.

     DNJ is expected to respond.