Uba’s £1.9m suit to go on despite process challenge

Justice Sylvanus Oriji of a Federal Capital Territory High Court sitting in Apo has slated May 24, 2017 for hearing of a suit filed by Victor Uwajeh against Andy Uba, a serving Senator, even though the processes filed before the court were faulted.

Mahmoud Magaji SAN, counsel to Uba at the resumption of the matter, had informed the court of an application he filed on in respect of the suit.

However, Anthony Agbonlahor, counsel representing Uwajeh opposed the motion on notice on the grounds that it was filed and served on him on March 26, without seal and stamp of the Nigerian Bar Association.

He argued before the court that the second prayer on the motion paper “is a deeming order but the seal on the statement of defence served on us yesterday has expired since March.

“In view of this My Lord, the process is not competent before the court. Perhaps it’s a mistake on my side for not checking properly because the process was served on me at night”.

Magaji however insisted the process is competent arguing that the Nigerian Bar Association has not provided legal practitioners with the recent seal.

He went ahead to display as evidence, a receipt issued by NBA showing payment for the seal, just as he cited a case; Today’s Motors Ltd vs Lannasco Associates and others 2016, wherein the Court of Appeal held that a court can receive a process where the evidence of payment of NBA stamp and seal has been shown.

Uba through his counsel, orally sought the leave of the court to make an order restraining the plaintiff (Uwajeh) from embarking on “media trial” against his client, pointing out that in line with Section 6(6) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, “the court has inherent power to adjudicate over judicial matters” and wondered while the plaintiff would resort to self help not minding the pendency of the case before the court.

In opposition to the oral application, Agbonlahor told the court that his client (Uwajeh) had instituted the legal action since 2016, “and nobody heard of it not until the defendant wrote a petition to the Inspector General of Police on April 7, 2017 alleging blackmail, intent to extort huge sums of money and threat to life.

“My Lord, the plaintiff only reacted to the allegation of blackmail by the defendant which was widely reported in the media”, Agbonlahor said.

The trial court however told parties that it was not going to make any such orders, but instead cautioned parties to refrain from any act or comment that would prejudice hearing of the matter.

In a short ruling, the court held that there is evidence of payment of fees for stamp and seal of NBA and therefore processes bearing an expired seal or no stamp at all cannot be said to be invalid, before adjourning the matter to May 24, 2017 for hearing.