Tag: Court

  • Woman docked for stealing grinding machine

    Woman docked for stealing grinding machine

    A 38-year-old woman, Mary Irabor, was on Tuesday arraigned in an Oredo Magistrates’ Court in Benin for stealing a grinding machine.

    The Prosecutor, ASP Sylvester Omor, said that the accused along with others now at large, committed the offence on Aug. 22, at No. 741 East Circular road, Benin.

    Omor told the court that the grinding machine that was valued at N35,000 , was the property of one Janet Iria.

    He said that the accused also obtained credit facility of N120, 480 under false pretext from one Evelyn Edobor.

    The prosecutor said the offences contravened sections 516, 419 (1) (a) and 390 (4) (a) of the Criminal Code Cap. 48 Vol. ll laws of the defunct Bendel State of Nigeria, 1976, as applicable in Edo.

    The accused pleaded not guilty to the three-count charge of conspiracy, fraud and stealing.

    The Magistrate, Mrs C.A. Nwoha, granted the accused bail in the sum of N50, 000 and a surety in like sum.

    Nwoha adjourned the case till Nov. 27 for hearing.

  • Court adjourns suit stool till Dec 8

    A High Court in Sagamu has adjourned till December 8 a suit by Prince Adetayo Odunsi challenging the nomination of Albert Mayungbe as Odemo of Isara, Remo.

    Justice A. A. Babawale fixed the  date after asking parties to file the issues for determination.

    The co-defendants in the suit with number HCS/158/2013 are the head of the ruling house, Prince Obafemi Awoyade; Secretary, Remo North Local Government;  Oliwo of Isara, Chief Ajibowu Ogunfowodu; Apena of Isara, Chief Jimoh Soyombo; Chief Ladipo Ogunyemi; Ogbeni Odi of Isara, Chief Olajubu Osibote; Ekeji Asipa Odi, Chief Tunde Kalejaiye; Asipa Odi of Isara, Chief Owuye Logba.

    Others are Ekeji Asipa Odi of Isara, Chief Efuwape Sotikare; Olori Emo of Isara, Chief Bashiru Awoniyi; Ekeji Olori Emo of Isara, Chief Korede Ogunwole; Asipa Emo of Isara, Chief Nosiru Sodipe; Ekeji Asipa Emo, Chief Adewole Sopitan; Governor of Ogun State; Executive Council of Ogun State; Commissioner for Chieftaincy and Local Government and the Attorney-General as second to 18th defendants.

    Although the matter was slated for mention last week, counsel to the claimant, Mrs. U. S. Ihekoronye prayed the court to fix a date for pre-trial conference (PTC)  as they had all filed necessary processes.

    She said her client had earlier filed his reply to the statement of defence and defence to the counter claim of the first, second, sixth to tenth and 14th defendants.

    Ihekoronye explained that they did not file statement on issues for determination in the matter because the former trial judge,  Justice Olugboyega  Ogunfowora, did not ask for it.

    Counsel for the defendants, A.O. Odusanya confirmed Ihekoronye’s submissions.

    Justice Babawale ordered the counsels to file all necessary processes in the matter, including new ones, if any, before the next adjourned date.

    In his 32 points’ statement of claim, Prince Odunsi , who is a direct descendant of the late Oba Oyemade Mayungbe and progenitor of Erinsiba-Ayoledoye Ruling House had averred that he is lawfully entitled to the stool of Odemo of Isara-Remo.

    Odunsi gave  a chrological order of the obas produced by the ruling house and averred that their progenitor was Rosanlu, who was also known as Erinsiba “begat Oyetade who in turn begat Oyemade, also known as Mayungbe alias Ayoledoye”.

    The claimant added that Mayungbe had four wives, Arobo being third.                                                                                                                                                                      The claimant averred that as at the time Mayungbe, also known as Ayoledoye, married Arobo, who hailed from Akure, she came with a male child named Ogunsakin from her earlier marriage andwhen he later became king, he accommodated Ogunsakin in the palace.

    According to the claimant, when Oba Oyetade Mayungbe ascended the throne,  and in order to differentiate Ogunsakin,  his stepson and an outsider, from other children in the palace, he made Ogunsakin an “Odi” meaning a servant to the king.

    He averred that under Yoruba custom and tradition applicable in Isara-Remo, an “Odi” is not a member of a ruling house and can never qualify for nomination into the stool of Odemo of Isara-Remo”.

    Odunsi sought seven prayers and orders against the defendants: “ a declaration that the first defendant is not a member of the Erinsiba-Adyoledoye Ruling House and therefore not qualified to contest for the stool; that under native law and custom applicable in Isara and Remoland generally, an Odi (servant of the king) or  any of his descendants is not qualified to contest for the stool; that the first defendant’s late grandfather and father, late Ogunsakin and Oyekunle Mayungbe were Odi  to the late Oba Samuel Akinsanya and late Oba Adeboboye Osideinde  and therefore not qualified to aspire or to be considered for nomination to the stool.”

    He, therefore, sought an order of the court setting aside the nomination exercise of Erinsiba/Ayoledoye ruling house held on February 21, 2011 at which meeting the first defendant emerged as one of the candidates for the Odemo of Isara chieftaincy.

    In their statement of defence and counter claim, the first, second, sixth to tenth and 14 th defendants admitted some of the averments of the claimant and deny others.

    The first defendant, Albert Mayungbe, insisted on being a “bonafide member  and descendant of the Erinsiba/Ayoledoye Ruling House and that the late Oba Mayungbe, aside from being a trader, met and married Arobo in Akure where Ogunsakin, his grandfather, was born.

    They  prayed the court for an order of mandamus compelling the 15th and 16th defendants to give approval to the appointment of the first defendant as the new Odemo-elect of Isara-Remo.

    But the claimant, in his reply to the statement of defence and counter claim of the first, second, sixth to tenth and 14th defendants  contended that the first defendant is not a bonafide member and descendant of the Erinsiba/Ayoledoye Ruling House.

    The claimant further contended that even though Ogunsakin was Arobo’s child, he was not fathered by the late Oba Mayungbe and that the late monarch was never a trader who lived in Akure.  The claimant averred that as at the time Mayungbe married Arobo, he was already a king in Isara and married to two wives.

    He averred  that it was while he was on the throne that Arobo came to Isara with a child known as Ogunsakin and was accomodated in the palace because she had no place to sleep. He added that Oba Mayungbe later took interest in her and married her.

    He therefore prayed the court to dismiss the counter claim of the defendants with punitive costs.

    The stool has been vacant since the death of the former occupant, Oba  Idowu Onadeko about eight years ago.

     

     

  • Court adjourns Dasuki’s case to November 23

    Court adjourns Dasuki’s case to November 23

    A Federal High Court in Abuja on Monday adjourned the case of retired Col. Sambo Dasuki, till November 23.

    The Judge, Justice Adeniyi Ademola, who adjourned the case following an oral application from the Solicitor-General of the Federation, Mr Taiwo Abidogun.

    Ademola held that the adjournment would enable the Attorney General of the Federation appear and explain the siege on Dasuki’s Abuja residence.

    Abidogun, who appeared for the first time on Dasuki’s case, had told the court that the attorney-general and Minister of Justice had just been sworn-in.

    He told the court that he needed time to study the case and to enable him brief the minister on the matter.

    The solicitor-general informed the court that the minister had yet to assume office.

    He said that the minister would assume office on Wednesday, Novemebr 18 and would be briefed about Dasuki’s case.

    He, therefore, urged the court to allow them to appear on Monday.

    Dasuki’s Counsel, Mr. Joseph Daudu SAN, did not oppose the application.

     

     

  • Court refuses to restrain  NCC over N1.4tr MTN fine

    Court refuses to restrain NCC over N1.4tr MTN fine

    • Payment deadline lapses today

    The Federal High Court in Lagos has refused to grant an ex-parte application by the Incorporated Trustees of National Association of Telecommunications Subscribers (NATCOMS) against the Nigerian Communications Commission (NCC) over the N1.4trillion fine imposed on MTN.

    Justice Mohammed Idris declined to make interim orders, but asked the plaintiffs to serve the defendants with the motion on notice.

    The judge also abridged the time for hearing and granted an order for the plaintiffs to serve the respondents outside Lagos.

    The association and its President Oluyinka Oyeniji (who sued for themselves and on behalf of MTN subscribers), sought an injunction restraining NCC from “exerting, enforcing and further imposing or enforcing any sanctions on the second respondent (MTN) especially the sum of N1.4trn.”

    NCC had imposed the fine on MTN over its alleged harbouring of some 5.2million pre-registered subscriber identity module (SIM) cards on its network. The telco has today as deadline to pay the fine, failure of which it might face stiffer sanctions from the regulator.

    Efforts by the telco to reach an amicable settlement with the regulator appeared to have fallen through while the Group Chief Executive Officer, Mr. Sifiso Dabengwa had resigned his position last week. This development had fuelled calls by stakeholders in the telecoms sector, on its Nigeria CEO, Mr. Michael Ipkoki, to resign his appointment too.

    The plaintiffs also sought to restrain MTN from making any payments regarding the N1.4trillion penalty pending the determination of the Motion on Notice.

    They prayed for an order for parties to maintain status quo (which means nonpayment of any sanctions or penalty regarding the deactivation of subscribers pending the argument of the substantive suit).

    Among others, the plaintiffs sought an order mandating NCC to render documentary evidence of accounts showing the fines imposed on MTN and other telecommunications operators, including their appropriation and disbursement from 2002 till date.

    In an originating summons, the plaintiffs sought a declaration that both NCC and MTN are statutorily responsible for the registration of telephone subscribers based on NCC (Registration of Telephone Subscribers) Regulations, 2011.

    They prayed the court to declare that NCC failed in its statutory duties to conduct monthly updates of the central database from 2011 till 2015, and to efficiently maintain it despite “huge sums” of money deployed.

    The plaintiffs asked the court to declare the N1.4trillion fine as illegal, unconstitutional, null and void because NCC cannot unilaterally impose and/or exert any fine on a telecoms firm without a court’s order after conviction for an infraction.

    NATCOMS also wants to the court to hold that NCC cannot be a judge in its own case by imposing a fine on MTN.

    The plaintiffs sought orders mandating NCC to onduct monthly updates on the central database; to conduct rigorous campaigns for telephone subscribers to update their particulars; to apologise to subscribers for failing in its duties; to account for all the fines it had imposed on telecoms operators; and to utilise fines imposed upon conviction as compensation to telephone subscribers.

    They sought N10million as cost of the action.

    In a supporting affidavit, Oyeniji said subscribers had volunteered their details before now to the respondents. Besides, he said NCC has not accounted for previous fines.

    “I am aware that the dispute resolution procedure of the NCC Act, 2003 have not been followed by the first respondent and the latter itself is culpable having failed to guarantee the integrity and incorruptibility of the Central Database from 2011 until the end of 2015,” he said. Justice Idris adjourned till November 19 for hearing.

  • Dasuki: Court invites AGF 

    Dasuki: Court invites AGF 

    A Federal High Court in Abuja yesterday invited the Attorney General of the Federation (AGF), Abubakar Malami (SAN)  for clarification over the inability of former National Security Adviser (NSA), Mohammed Dasuki, to travel abroad on health ground.

    The court’s invitation to the AGF was informed by  a  complaint by Dasuki’s lawyer, Mr. Joseph Daudu (SAN) that the former NSA was prevented from embarking on the trip by security agents  despite the order made by the court on November 3 giving him the nod to travel.

    Besides, Daudu said, security agents laid siege to Dasuki’s Abuja home.

    The lawyer from the Federal Ministry of Justice, Labaran Magaji, denied Daudu’s claim that the state had prevented his client from travelling abroad as ordered by the court.

    Justice Adeniyi Ademola expressed concern about Daudu’s complaint  and that  since the AGF is new in office he should  be invited to  brief the court  on the issue.

    ”Having perused the processes filed by the applicant, particularly the motion on notice dated 9th November 2015 and the respondent’s counter processes, it is important that the Attorney General of the Federation, being the chief law officer of the country, comes to court to be briefed about the issue,” the judge said.

    Justice Ademola noted that from the fresh motion on notice and counter affidavit filed by parties in the case, he was not happy about the scenario that was playing out. He said he was uncomfortable that the court’s subsisting order was reportedly not obeyed.

    He adjourned to November 16 for hearing of the new motion and counter-motions filed by parties.

    Dasuki is seeking, among others, an order compelling the federal government and its agents, especially operatives of the DSS, to immediately vacate his premises on 13, John Kadija Street, Asokoro, Abuja.

    The ex-NSA, in his motion, claimed that men of the DSS have constituted a  threat to his life and that he was  prevented from travelling abroad to attend to his ailing health pursuant to an earlier order contained in a ruling by Justice Adeniyi Ademola of the Federal High Court, Abuja.

    He stated that the judge had, by his order made on November 3, ordered the release of his travel documents to enable him attend to his pressing health needs abroad.

    Dasuki  also wants the court to order the removal of “all human and non-human barricades, bulwarks and or siege laid around, about and across” his residence at No. 13, John Kadiya Street, Asokoro District, Abuja.

    He  prays for an extension the court’s order made on November 3, to make up for the delay caused by the siege to his house.

    Dasuki equally wants the court to dispense with his appearance from court during the hearing of the application.

    In a supporting affidavit, the ex-NSA stated that “by the act and overt aggression of the complainant/privies, the security and life of the defendant/applicant is being constantly threatened.”

  • Court bars banks from ‘instigating’ Kashamu’s arrest

    Court bars banks from ‘instigating’ Kashamu’s arrest

    The Federal High Court in Lagos Thursday barred five commercial banks from instigating Senator Buruji Kashamu’s arrest by security agencies over an alleged debt.

    Justice Chukwujekwu Aneke made an order of perpetual injunction restraining the banks and their officers from instigating the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFFC) to arrest, interrogate or detain Kashamu.

    It is with regards to “an innocuous and unblemished civil contractual transaction” between Kashamu and the banks.

    The banks are Ecobank Nigeria Limited, Union Bank Plc, Enterprise Bank Plc, Zenith Bank Plc and First City Monument Bank Plc.

    The judge declared that the EFCC and the police were not empowered to act as debt collectors.

    Kashumu sued along with his companies: Kasmal Properties Limited, Hotel De Island Limited, Nacoil International Limited, Hotel De Island Bureau De Change Limited, Island Auto International Limited, Daily Capital Microfinance Limited and Kasmal Group of Companies.

    They claimed the banks were being used by his political opponents to send the EFCC after him over loans he obtained.

    “The applicants’ relationships with the third to seventh respondents (banks)  are purely banker/customer relationships with valuable security collaterising all loans taken from the banks and therefore devoid of criminality as to justify reference to law enforcement agents.

    “The first and second respondents (EFCC and IGP) are agencies of government charged with the responsibility of combating economic and financial crimes respectively in Nigeria.

    “In the course of their relationships with the third to seventh respondents (banks), the plaintiffs have not committed any economic, financial or general crime as to warrant being reported to and or interrogated and detained by the first and second respondents.

    “I believe that the indebtedness of a customer to his bank is not a crime under the laws of the Federal Republic of Nigeria,” Kashamu said in a supporting affidavit.

    He urged the court to declare that the respondents had violated his fundamental rights to liberty and to own property under sections 35 and 44 of the 1999 Constitution for harassing, intimidating, arresting and threatening him with detention.

    However, Ecobank asked the court to dismiss or strike out Kashamu’s suit for being a gross abuse of the court processes.

  • Girl to die for killing parents in Bangladesh

    Girl to die for killing parents in Bangladesh

    A Dhaka Court on Thursday sentenced a 20-year-old girl to death for killing her parents two years ago, officials said.

    Judge Sayeed Ahmed handed down the verdict against Oishee Rahman for killing her police officer father Mahfuzur Rahman and mother Swapna Rahman in August 2013, prosecutor Mohammad Rahman said.

    The court also sentenced one of her friends to two years in prison for her role in the murder.

    Investigators said Oishee Rahman served sedative-laced coffee to her parents before stabbing them in their home in Dhaka’s Central Malibagh Area.

    Police recovered the couple’s bodies two days later and their daughter surrendered at the police station the day after that.

    Defence lawyer Faruk Ahmed said his client would challenge the verdict in a higher court.

  • Tension in Akure as Adepoju  challenges deposition in court

    Tension in Akure as Adepoju challenges deposition in court

    Five years after his dethronement as the Deji of Akure by the Ondo State government, Adesina Adepoju yesterday appeared at the Akure High Court.

    The public appearance followed a suit he instituted against the Deji of Akure and the government.

    Members of the Osupa ruling house were in court in solidarity with Adepoju.

    There was tension in Akure that the deposed Deji was quizzed by detectives from the state police command after leaving the court.

    The deposed monarch had instituted a case challenging his dethronement by the government and the installation of Oba Ogunlade Aladetoyinbo as the Deji of Akure.

    Adepoju claimed that he was wrongly deposed by the government and sought for an order of court declaring him as the Deji of Akure.

    He was dethroned on June 10, 2010 for allegedly assaulting one of his wives, the late Mrs. Bolanle Adepoju, in public.

    The deposed monarch was consequently banished to a location within the state before he left for the United Kingdom (UK).

    His removal paved the way for the installation of the late Oba Adebiyi Adesida in 2010 as the 46th Deji of Akure. His daughter was installed regent after his death.

    Adepoju’s counsel Olalekan Ojo told the court that the monarch has the right to the throne and wondered why a new monarch was installed.

    The Chief Judge, Justice Olaseinde Kumuyi, adjourned hearing till December 8.

    Adepoju, who left the court in a convoy, danced to his family compound on Odo Ijoka Street, where he addressed his loyalists, who were mainly family members.

    Police spokesman Femi Joseph denied Adepoju’s rumoured arrest, saying “the man has not committed any offence to warrant his arrest by the police”.

    He said the presence of police officers on the streets, especially around the residence of the deposed monarch, was to ensure security of lives and property.

    “The police have the right to prevent hoodlums from hijacking the situation,” Joseph said.

     

  • Court grants bank leave to  foreclose alleged debtor hotel

    Court grants bank leave to foreclose alleged debtor hotel

    The Federal High Court in Lagos has granted leave to Diamond Bank to foreclose and sell Luxury Collection Hotels and Apartments, formerly Le Meridian Grand Tower in Ikoyi Crescent, Ikoyi, Lagos, belonging to Chief Sunny Odogwu.

    Justice Saliu Saidu ordered Odogwu and his two companies, Robert Dyson and Diet Limited and SIO Properties Limited, to pay N26.2 billion owed the bank as loan obtained eight years ago.

    The bank, through its lawyer, Oluwakemi Balogun (SAN), urged the court to compel Odogwu and his companies to pay N26,229,943,035.22, which they obtained from it to construct the hotel.

    Corporate Affairs Commission (CAC), the Registrar of Title, Federal Land Registry and Leadway Trustees Limited, were the fourth, fifth and sixth defendants.

    The plaintiff, in a supporting affidavit by the bank’s Relationship Manager, Fanen Shambe, averred that sometime in 2007, an agreement was reached to grant Odogwu and the companies the loan.  He said he believed the defendants were insolvent, bankrupt and unable to meet their financial obligation.

    Justice Seidu, who earlier ordered 19 banks not to allow Odogwu and his companies withdraw from their accounts, held that the defendants admitted indebtedness but have not shown how to liquidate the debt.

    The court perpetually restrained the third defendant from disposing, selling or alienating any of his personal assets, money, share, stock and other negotiable instrument until the judgment sum is liquidated.

     

  • You must face trial, court tells SCOAN engineers

    You must face trial, court tells SCOAN engineers

    The Federal High Court in Lagos yesterday dismissed applications by the two engineers who built the collapsed six-storey guest house of the Synagogue Church Of All Nations (SCOAN).

    Justice Ibrahim Buba dismissed their rights enforcement suits which sought to prevent their arrest, saying they lacked merit.

    Oladele Ogundeji and Akinbela Fatiregun had sought to prevent their trial over the fatality which occurred last September 12, killing 116 persons.

    They urged the court to restrain the Lagos State government and the police from inviting, arresting or prosecuting them after they were indicted by a District Coroner, Oyetade Komolafe.

    After an inquest, the coroner held in his verdict that the building collapsed due to structural defects.

    Ogundeji and Fatiregun filed two suits against the Commissioner of Police, the Council for the Regulation of Engineering in Nigeria (COREN), the Lagos Attorney-General and Komolafe.

    The applicants prayed the court to declare that the police lack the power to act on the coroner’s verdict to investigate or prosecute them.

    Among others, they wanted the court to perpertually restrain the Attorney-General or any officer under his authority from initiating or commencing criminal proceedings against them on the basis of the coroner’s findings and recommendations.

    The engineers had, through their lawyer, Mr. Olalekan Ojo, rejected the coroner’s verdict, describing it as “unreasonable, one-sided and biased.”

    But the respondents, in a preliminary objection, contended that the applicants’ main complaint is not for enforcement of their fundamental human rights but to challenge the Coroner’s verdict.

    Dismissing the application, Justice Buba held the engineers did not make a successful case that their rights were about to be infringed.

    He ruled on one of the applications and adopted it for the second engineer’s similar application.

    According to him, the Coroner’s Law was an enactment of the Lagos State House of Assembly constitutionally empowered to make laws.

    “The Federal High Court cannot dabble into the affairs of the state and start dishing out injunctive orders,” said the judge.

    Upholding the respondents’ preliminary objection, the judge added: “The coroner’s inquest is not a court of law. It does not find anybody guilty. It only recommends.”

    Arguing the application, Ojo had said: “The fulcrum of the applicants’ case is that they were not charged with any offence before the coroner; they merely appeared as witnesses and the coroner went on to indict them of criminal negligence and it is a nullity.

    But the respondents, through a senior state counsel Mr. A. Bakare argued that the engineers’ case was not about fundamental rights enforcement but intended to stop government agents from performing their statutory duties.