The Nation Newspaper

Tag: Justice Nnamdi Dimgba

  • Court restores judgement against INEC, others over patent rights infringement

    *Judgment affects use of ballot box, card reader, PVC, others

    A Federal High Court in Abuja has restored a judgement by the court on July 5, 2015 affirming the patent rights of a firm – Bedding Holdings Limited – over some inventions that formed the core of electoral operations of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC).

    The patent rights, the firm said, covered the systems being used by INEC for voters’ registration, Permanent Voter’s Card (PVC), card reader, transparent ballot boxes, among others.

    Justice Nnamdi Dimgba, in an ex-parte ruling on Tuesday, a copy of which our correspondent sighted on Wednesday, also gave permission to the firm to commence the process of enforcing the judgment given by Justice Adamu Bello (now a retired judge of the court).

    The ruling was on an application filed by Bedding Holdings Limited (BHL), marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/153/2018.

    Listed as respondents in the application are INEC, the Attorney General of the Federation (AGF) and Registrar of Patents, Federal Ministry of Commerce and Industry.

    Justice Dimgba, in the ruling, said: “An order is hereby made restoring the validity of the judgement delivered by Hon. Justice A. Bello in suit No. FHC/ABJ/CS/82/2011 on the 5th day of June 2012.

    “An order is hereby made granting leave to the plaintiff/applicant to enforce the judgement delivered by Hon. Justice A. Bello in suit No. FHC/ABJ/CS/82/2011 on the 5th day of June 2012.”

    The judge adjourned to January 15, 2019 for hearing of the motion on notice filed by BHL for the enforcement of the judgment.

    The respondents are, between now and then, expected to also file their responses to the motion on notice.

    BHL, in a supporting affidavit, deposed to by its Chief Executive Officer (CEO), Sylvester Odigie, claimed the respondents have continued to disregard  the judgment of June 5, 2012 and a subsequent one of January 28, 2014 which further confirmed its (the firm’s) exclusive patent rights over the said inventions.

    It adds that his firm specialises in the fabrication and manufacture of steel metal products such as transparent ballot boxes, electronic transparent boxes, among other products.

    BHL stated that: “On 12th January, 1998 the applicant (BHL) was issued with Certificate of Registration of Patent Rights No. RP 12994 and Registration of Industrial Designs Rights No. RD 5946 in and over the invention named Transparent Ballot Boxes (“TBB”) by the 3rd respondent (Registrar of Patents).

    “Also on 27th November, 2006, the applicant registered and was issued with the Patent Rights No. RP 16642 and COpyright Designs No. RD 13841 in and over the invention named “Electronic Collapsible Transparent Ballot Boxes”, an improved derivative of TBB, which integral features include the Electronic Card Reader (ECR) and it’s derivable Permanent Voters’ Card (PVC) thereof and Patent Rights NORP NG/P/2010/202, Proof of Address System/Scheme (PASS) (Embedded with the concept of the Coded Metal Plate) the process and-application of which is used to produce the voter’s register.”

  • Alleged N4.75bn, $5m fraud: Ex-Skye Bank’s Chair, MD, arraigned

    *Each gets N50m bail

    Former Chairman and Managing Director of Skye Bank Plc (now Polaris Bank) – Tunde Ayeni and Timothy Oguntayo – have been arraigned in relation to alleged money laundering offences involving about N4.75billion and $5million.

    Ayeni and Oguntayo were arraigned on Monday before Justice Nnamdi Dimgba of the Federal High Court, Abuja on an eight-count charge brought against them by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).

    Read Also: Diamond Bank confirms merger with Access Bank

    The duo, who was accused of committing the alleged offences between 2014 and 2015, pleaded not guilty when the charge was read.

    Their lawyers applied for bail on their behalf, applications the judge granted, admitting each of the defendants to bail at N50million each.

     

    …Details later.

  • Court insists on hearing suit challenging Akeredolu’s election

    A Federal High Court in Abuja has rejected the request by Ondo State Governor, Oluwarotimi Akeredolu to strike out a suit by Olusegun Abraham, challenging his (Akeredolu’s) emergence as candidate of the All Progressives Congress (APC) in the last governorship election in the state.

    The court also rejected Akeredolu’s arguments that it lacked jurisdiction to hear the suit; that the suit relates to issues that are internal to the party: that the suit was inchoate, among others.

    Read Also:Ondo: Akeredolu urged to intervene in Akure North APC crisis

    Justice Nnamdi Dimgba, in a ruling on Friday, although agreed with Akeredolu that the suit was wrongly commenced, he however refused to strike it out, as requested by the governor.

    Instead, the judge converted the suit, originally commenced by way of Originating Summons, to be heard under the Writ of Summons rules, on the grounds that facts in the case were contentions and would required parties to file pleadings.

    Justice Dimgba, whose ruling was on two notices of objection filed by Akeredolu, APC and the party’s National Chairman, gave parties up to November 30 this year, to file and exchange all pleadings.

    He adjourned to December 6 and 7 for hearing.

    Abraham is, by the suit, marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/788/2016, seeking the nullification of the APC’s September 3, 2016 governorship primary, from which Akeredolu emerged as the party’s candidate, on the grounds that it was allegedly manipulated.

     

    Details later….

  • Alleged contempt: Saraki concedes, pays Omo-Agege’s entitlements

    *Case against Senate, its President withdrawn

    The Senate President, Bukola Saraki has evaded the trouble of being subjected to trial for contempt as he conceded to the request for the payment of Senator Ovie Omo-Agege’s withheld entitlements.

    The information that Saraki has authorised the payment of Omo-Agege’s entitlements was made public on Thursday by his (Omo-Agege’s) lawyer, Alex Izinyon (SAN).

    Izinyon made the disclosure at the resumption of proceedings in the contempt case initiated against Saraki and the Senate by Omo-Agege, before the Federal High Court, Abuja.

    Omo-Agege (representing Delta Central) initiated the contempt proceedings over allegation that Saraki and the Senate refused to obey a portion of the court’s earlier judgment ordering that he (Omo-Agege), who was earlier suspended, be paid his entitlements.

    The Saraki-led Sanate had, earlier this year, suspended Omo-Agege, which suspension the court, in a May 10, 2018 judgement, set aside, ordered his reinstatement and the payment of all his accrued benefits for the period of the suspension.

    Omo-Agege later returned to the court with a contempt case against Saraki and the Senate, claiming that while they reinstated him, Saraki and the Senate withheld his entitlements in disobedience to the court’s judgment.

    On the last adjourned date, October 11 this year, Izinyon prayed the court to hear his client’s committal application against Saraki and the Senate, who were absent in court.

    But instead, Justice Nnamdi Dimgba said he would give Saraki another chance to either “remedy the alleged wrong” or appear in court to defend himself, and adjourned to October 18.

    Read Also: Court grants Shittu’s prayer to serve NYSC processes

    On Thursday, when the case was called, Saraki was also absent. But he and the Senate were represented by a lawyer, Efut Okoi.

    Izinyon told the court that his client was paid his entitlements on October 12, 2018, barely 24 hours after the court elected to accord Saraki another chance to either right the alleged wrong or attend court to enter defence in the contempt case.

    Izinyon said after the last proceedings, he ensure that Saraki was served with the court order of October 11, along with a letter from his chambers informing him of Thursday’s date.

    He added that on the next day, on October 12, a Special Assistants to Saraki informed him that his client has nine cheques waiting for him.

    Izinyon said he received the cheques on behalf of his client and acknowledged receipt.

    He said Omo-Agege acknowledged that there was a shortfall of N6m when the cheques were handed to him, Izinyon said when notified, the Senate President’s aide acknowledged that the Omo-Agege’s claim was correct.

    He added that the Saraki’s aide admitted that the shortfall was from an error in computation. He said the error was promptly rectified and the N6m paid to his client.

    Izinyon said, with the development, there was unnecessary to proceed with the contempt case.

    He applied to withdraw the contempt case, and application Okoi did not object to, following which Justice Dimgba struck the case out.

  • Court to hear suits against change of Senate leadership Sept 19

    A Federal High Court in Abuja has fixed September 19 for the hearing of about six suits seeking to stop the planned removal of Bukola Saraki as Senate President.

    In the main, all the suits want the court to declare as unlawful Saraki’s removal from office via means other than that provided in Section 50(2)(c) of the Constitution.

    Section 50(2) provides: “The President or Deputy President of the Senate or the Speaker or Deputy Speaker of the House of Representatives shall vacate his office…. (c) if he is removed from office by a resolution of the Senate or of the House of Representatives, as the case may be, by the votes of not less than two-thirds majority of the members of that House.”

    Read Also:Ojukwu’s children reject Bianca’s bid for Senate

    The September 19 hearing date was chosen Thursday by Justice Nnamdi Dimgba to enable parties file all necessary papers and prepare adequately.

    The suits include: United People’s Congress (UPC) vs. Attorney General of the Federation & four others (FHC/ABJ/CS/944/2018); Okpako Grant vs. All Progressives Congress & others (FHC/ABJ/CS/948/2018) and Senator Rafiu Adebayo & one other vs. The Senate of the Federal Republic of Nigeria & others (FHC/ABJ/CS/872/2018).

    Others are: Hon. Benjamin Tivfa vs. IGP & others (FHC/ABJ/CS/822/2018); The Incorporated Trustees of C.S.O.C.L.O. vs. Senator Bukola Saraki and others (FHC/ABJ/CS/936/2018); and Ikenga Imo Ugochinyere & another vs. The Senate of the Federal Republic of Nigeria & others (FHC/ABJ/CS/890/2018).

    UPC, in the suit filed by its lawyer, Chief M. A. Igwe, stated that there was need for a formal court’s pronouncement on the proper interpretation of the provision of the Constitution on the proper mode of changing the leadership of a federal legislative house.

    In a supporting affidavit deposed to by its National Chairman, Kenneth Ibe-Kalu, the plaintiff claimed that the determination of the suit would guide persons seeking election on its platform into the National Assembly as to their rights when elected as legislators as well as the rights of their party.

    The UPC said it is already planning a retreat, which will be regular, for all its candidates for the 2019 elections, to let the candidates understand their rights and powers, including their rights and powers as sought to be declared by the court.

    It added that: “As a registered political party, the plaintiff has a right to know the true position of the law as provided by the constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended), as the provisions of the Constitution are not self-executory.

    “That it is only a court set up under the 1999 Constitution (as amended) as this Honourable Court that has the power to interpret the Constitution”.

    The plaintiff wants the court to declare:  “That the President of the Senate, the Deputy President of the Senate, the speaker of the House of Representatives and the Deputy Speaker of the House of Representatives can only be removed from office by the provisions of section 50(1) (a) and (b) and section 50 (2) (c) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 as amended and in particular, can only be removed by a resolution of that House by votes of members not less than two-thirds majority of ALL the members of that House.”

    It also seeks a declaration “that the two-thirds majority for removal of President of the Senate, the Deputy President of the Senate, the speaker of the House of Representatives and the Deputy Speaker of the House of Representatives as provided in section 50(1) (a) and (b) and section 50 (2) (c) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 as amended refers to two-thirds of All members of that House and not two-thirds of members present at the sitting.”

    Defendants in the suit are: the Attorney General of the Federation, National Assembly, President of the Senate, Speaker, House of Representatives and Clerk of the National Assembly.

  • Court refuses to order forfeiture of funds in accounts without BVN

    A Federal High Court in Abuja has refused a prayer by the Federal Government (FG) for the permanent forfeiture of funds in accounts without commercials banks without Bank Verification Number (BVN).

    Justice Nnamdi Dimgba, in a judgment on Friday, said the prayer could not be granted because the Federal Government has not laid sufficient foundation for the grant of such prayer.

    The judgment was on a suit marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/911/2017, filed by the FG and the Attorney General of the Federation (AGF) against Access Banks, other commercial banks and Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN).

    Read Also:31.4million customers captured in BVN, says CBN

    The judge said the FG has not met the conditions provided under Section 17 of the Advance Fee Fraud Act, by proving that the funds in the BVN-less accounts are proceeds of crime and that they are unclaimed.

    Justice Dimgba said the interim freezing order on the accounts,  made by the court on October 17, 2017 but modified on November 15, 2017, still subsists.

    The order is: “An interim order of the honourable court stopping all outward payments, operations or outward transactions (including any bill of exchange) in respect of the accounts pending the linking of the accounts to a Bank Verification Number”.

    The judge asked the Federal Government to take the necessary steps to fulfil the conditions under Section 17 of the Advanced Fee Fraud Act and ensure compliance with the October 17, 2017 order

     

  • Omo-Agege saga: Group wants Senate to respect court ruling

    The Buhari Support Organization, BSO, yesterday in Katsina urged the senate to respect recent court ruling on suspended Senator Omo-Agege, APC, and Delta North, saying it will promote democracy and rule of law for which the Senate has been known for.

    The group which made the call at a press briefing addressed by its state Chairman, Dr Abba Y. Abdullahi, also frowned at what it called ‘’the ill-treatment’’ meted out to the distinguished senator, said such treatment constitutes an affront  to the law and principles of human right and free speech.

    He said; we wish to appeal to you to urgently implement the court ruling and reverse the suspension of Omo-Agege, stop any further victimization of the Senator and apologize to him and Nigerians for exposing him and his constituency to public ridicule’’

    Recall that on Thursday Justice Nnamdi Dimgba of the Abuja Division of the Federal High Court ruled that the Senate’s decision on Omo-Agege, regarding the suspension, as well as the pattern adopted by the National Assembly, was constitutionally defective.

    Mr Omo-Agege, representing Delta Central, had approached the court, after the Senate’s committee on ethics and privileges began investigating his comments condemning the Senate over the National Assembly’s decision to amend the electoral act.

    In another development, the Buhari Support Organization, BSO, has called on Nigerians to support the re-election bids of both President Muhammadu Buhari and Governor Aminu Bello Masari of Katsina state.

    In a press briefing held in Katsina which was addressed by its state Chairman, Abba Abdullahi, the group noted that President Buhari has recorded several landmark achievements since assuming power, including stabilizing the economy, ensuring food security through improved Agriculture, decimating terrorist activities nationwide, and improving the image relations of the country abroad among others

    On Masari ,the group noted that the state have never had it so good in the hands of previous past administrations, arguing that additional 4 year for him will consolidate the gains and achievements of his administration

    He said ‘’gentlemen, the task of making Nigeria great again is the patriotic duty of all Nigerians. Similarly, the task of sustaining the unity of this country is the collective responsibility of all’’

     

  • Omo-Agege’s suspension not supported by any law – Malami

    …Court fixes judgment for May 10 in suspended Senator’s suit

     

    The Minister of Justice and Attorney General of the Federation (AGF), Abubakar Malami (SAN) argued Monday that the decision by the Senate to suspend the Senator representing Delta Central Senatorial District, Ove Omo-Agege was not supported by any known law.

    Malami equally contended that the suspension violated the right of the constituency represented by Senator Omo-Agege to participate in the country’s governance and to be so represented.

    The AGF made his position on the issue public Monday at the hearing of the suit by the suspended Senator, challenging the legality of the Senate’s decision.

    The Solicitor General of the Federation (SGF), Dayo Apata, who represented Malami said the AGF’s position in the case was informed by his constitutional responsibility as the defender and guardian of the Constitution

    He argued that although the AGF was sued as a defendant, he has the right to address this court on the need to prevent the breach of constitutional provisions by the Senate.

    Apata added: “In view of the position of the law, it is the 3rd defendant’s submission that the suspension of the plaintiff is not supported by law and should be set aside by this honourable court.

    “As a Senator, the plaintiff represents his senatorial district, whose electorate, through him, participate in the governance and his suspension for a whole lot of 90 days amount to punishing an entire senatorial district for a period of 90 days and denying them participation in the governance of the country, which is a legal right.

    “It is our submission that the suspension of the plaintiff for 90 legislative days without any legal backing is also an infringement of the rights of his people, who elected him to represent them in the Senate to participate in the governance of Nigeria, thus illegal and unconstitutional and we urge my Lord to so hold.”

    Earlier, the plaintiff’s lawyer, Alex Iziyon (SAN) urged the court to nullify the steps taken by the Senate; including his client’s suspension by the Senate during the pendency of a suit he (Omo-Agege) filed against the plan to suspend him.

    Iziyon said: “Under the consequential orders sought by the plaintiff, the court can nullify any other steps taken by the defendant during the pendency of this suit.

    He added that the court has the power to “pull down what has been done in defiance of court’s proceedings”.

    Relying on a number of court’s decision, prohibiting legislative houses from suspending legislators, Iziyon argued that the “this court has the power to undo what they have done.”

    Lawyers to the 1st and 2nd defendants (the Senate and its President), Mahmoud Magaji (SAN) urged the court to dismiss the suit.

    Magaji argued that the cases cited by Izinyon were distinguishable from Omo-Agege’s case.

    He noted that: “Exhibit MAM1 shows that the plaintiff is not an ordinary senator. He is a lawyer. In addition, he is a member of the committee that recommended his suspension.

    “He is number 13 on the list of the members of the committee. He participated in the proceedings of the committee that recommended the suspension of other senators, particularly Senator Ali Ndume.

    “Those who live by the sword must die by the sword”.

    Malami wondered why the senator, “who has been dishing out such punishment to his colleagues should come to court for protection for such punishment”.

    He argued that Omo-Agege was bound by the rules of the Senate and had no basis to challenge the action of the Senate against him.

    Malami said: “He (Omo-Agege) swore to an oath to be bound by the rules of the National Assembly, including the standing order,” Magaji said.

    After listening to arguments by parties, Justice Nnamdi Dimgba adjourned to May 10 for judgment.

    Earlier, the dismissed an application by the Chairman and Vice-Chairman of Senate Committee on Ethics, Privileges and Public Petitions, Senators Samuel Anyawu and Bala Na’Allah, seeking to be made parties in the case

    The judge upheld the objection put forward by Omo-Agege and the AGF against the two senators’ application.

    The judge upheld the contention that since the committee members were agents of a disclosed principal – the Senate and the Senate Principal, needed not to be joined in the suit.

    He added that they could not be joined because no contribution would they make in the case that the Senate and its President could not make.

    He also ruled that the application by the applicants were incompetent as they failed to file their proposed defence in respect of the suit as the court’s rules required of an applicant seeking to be joined in a suit.

    Read Also: Omo-Agege takes Senate, AGF to court

     

  • Court modifies orders freezing accounts without BVN

    Court modifies orders freezing accounts without BVN

    A Federal High Court in Abuja Wednesday modified the order it made on October 17 this year for interim freezing of bank accounts who owners have not registered for the Bank Verification Number (BVN)

    The court, which had stayed further operation of such accounts pending the determination of a case pending before it, has now said the accounts could be operated once the owner registers for BVN.

    Justice Nnamdi Dimgba announced the modification Wednesday after parties in the case agreed that as presently couched, the order creates an awkward and unfortunate result such that even when account owners have got their BVN, they still will not be able to operate the accounts because doing so will be in violation of the order of court.

    Parties in the case also agreed that the said Relief No 4 should be revised to eliminate this problem, in the interim.

    In a ruling, Justice Dimgba said: “Having listened to all counsel on record, and with the consent of all parties represented, I hereby revise Relief No 4 of the court’s order of 17/10/17 such that the new Relief No 4 shall be:

    “AN INTERIM ORDER of the Honourable Court stopping all outward payments, operations or outward transactions (including any bill of exchange) in respect of the accounts pending the linking of the accounts to a Bank Verification Number”.

    In view of the above agreed compromise revision of Relief No 4, I also hereby revoke and set aside Relief No 5 of the Court’s Order of 17/10/17, which provides for:

    “AN INTERIM ORDER of forfeiture of the monies in the said accounts without BVN to the Claimants/Applicants being accounts with insufficient Know Your Customer (KYC) guidelines contrary to Section 3 of the Money Laundering Act, 2011 and CBN guidelines the determination of the Originating Motion on Notice,” the judge said.

    As as yesterday, none of the 19 commercial banks listed as defendants in the suit complied with the court’s order that they provide information about accounts without BVN in their custody.

    They only filed a motion challenging the court’s jurisdiction.

    Earlier in the proceedings, lawyer to 18 of the 20 banks listed as defendants in the suit, A. A. Adegbonmire (SAN) said his clients have filed an application, challenging the court’s jurisdiction to have made the order of October 17.

    He said the plaintiffs served him with their response yesterday, which he needed time to react to.

    Adegbonmire urged the court for an adjournment, which was not objected to by Joseph Tobi (for the plaintiffs).

    The judge consequently adjourned further proceedings to December 11.

    The Federal Government and the Attorney General of the Federation had filed the suit, querying among others, the continuous retention of accounts without BVN by banks.

  • Recall: Drama as INEC dumps bags of documents at Melaye’s office

    Recall: Drama as INEC dumps bags of documents at Melaye’s office

    IT was all drama at the National Assembly yesterday as Senator Dino Melaye and officials of the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) engaged in hide-and-seek game over the Kogi West lawmaker’s recall.

    The INEC officials had arrived at the National Assembly complex as early as 11am with four ‘Ghana Must Go’ bags containing recall petitions and a heap of tied documents signed by constituents in Melaye’s  Kogi West.

    The INEC officials had split into two with one group waiting at the door of the senator’s office. The other group was monitoring the chambers, where Melaye kept himself busy with legislative duties.

    Apparently aware that some of the INEC officials were waiting for him in the frontage of his locked office at the Senate Wing of the complex, the lawmaker refused to go to his office after plenary.

    Melaye, who participated actively in the day’s proceedings, left the National Assembly complex without getting to his office as is the tradition with every lawmaker.

    Flustered by the senator’s antics, the electoral officials dumped the documents on the recall at the entrance of his office in the National Assembly.

    The documents were dumped around 11:00am.

    The INEC officials left the National Assembly complex at about 1.14pm disappointed.

    One after the other, they filed into a waiting Toyota Hiace bus that brought them.

    The controversial senator has been in a running battle with the INEC over plans by his constituents to recall him for alleged poor representation.

    He decided to buy time by approaching the courts to stop the process and succeeded in pushing the process for over the 90-day timeframe prescribed by the constitution.

    Melaye had, at a press briefing on Monday, washed his hands off the recall process, saying that the 90-day span prescribed by the Constitution had elapsed.

    However, Justice Nnamdi Dimgba in a later ruling, had ordered the INEC to start the process afresh by serving the relevant documents on the senator.

    At the last court appearance, INEC’s lawyers had sought to serve the senator through substituted service, but Justice Dimgba directed them to make another attempt at serving Melaye and that they should report back to court should the attempt fail.