Connect with us

News and Report

Skye Bank Loses Round One in Suit versus Centrespread Advertising

Published

on

A Lagos High Court has dismissed, for lack of admissible evidence, a preliminary application by Skye Bank for an order pronouncing that Centrespread Advertising had agreed to pay the sum of N525million as outstanding indebtedness to the bank and compelling the latter to pay same.

In a motion for interlocutory injunction in suit No: LD/2362GCMW/16 in which Centrespread is challenging Skye Bank’s claim of its continued indebtedness, the Skye Bank counsel, Solomon Mbadiwe, had prayed the Court to rule that Centrespread had, in a letter dated June 16, 2015 and Claimant of Affidavit of June 22, 2016, admitted and proposed the payment of the sum of N525million to Skye Bank as final settlement of the loan agreement between the two parties.

He therefore asked the court to compel Centrespread to make full payment of the stated sum to Skye Bank while hearing continues in the original suit.

Delivering his ruling on the application at the resumed sitting of the court in May, the trial judge, Hon. Justice A. M. Lawal of the Lagos High Court, threw out the Skye Bank application on the ground that it was based on inadmissible evidence.

“The letter dated June 16, 2015, from the caption and the contents of the letter, it is written towards settlement of the dispute existing between the parties. Letters written towards settlement are classified as ‘without prejudice’ and the privilege that attends ‘without prejudice’ communication will not be denied to a document simply because it is not captioned without prejudice. As the letter of June 16, 2015 was written with proposals for the settlement of the loan dispute, such is not admissible and cannot be the foundation of an application for Judgment upon admission”, Justice Lawal ruled.

The trial judge noted that the court was not unmindful that the figure of N525m said to have been admitted by Centrespread are found at paragraphs 5, 6 and 16 of the Claimant’s pleadings and paragraphs 9, 11 and 13 of the Claimant Affidavit of June 22, 2016 filed in support of the motion of June 22, 2016 for Interlocutory Injunction. He, however, added that ‘a readings of these traced the source of the said admitted figure of N525m to no other source other than the letter of June 15, 2016”, adding that “since the letter is not admissible being covered by the ‘without prejudice’ privilege, the said paragraphs of the pleadings and Affidavit are also not admissible for the purpose of an application for judgment based on admission”.

In the Statement of Claim filed by Centrespread in the originating suit, the frontline advertising agency averred that while it is true that a transaction was carried out between it and Skye Bank Plc in 2007, it had made good on the terms of the agreement to pay back the principal borrowed loan which, according to the terms of agreement, would expire in the year 2020.

Centrespread further averred that a few years ago, when it felt that it was being subjected to exorbitant charges by Skye Bank, it employed the services of forensic financial analysts who confirmed its concerns as true.

Centrespread is therefore praying the Court to, among other reliefs, declare Skye Bank’s claim that it still owes the total amount declared in its record as null and void since, according to it, a substantial part of the figure being touted as standing against its name has been discovered to be illegal charges.

Alternatively, the Claimant is also praying the honourable court to compel Skye Bank to release the claimant’s loan account statement and for the loan account statement to be analyzed by a forensic analyst to be appointed jointly by both parties for the determination of the Claimant’s actual indebtedness to the defendant.

Further hearing in the matter was adjourned till August 12th of this year.

Continue Reading
Advertisement

News and Report

Famous For High Standard: AFROGRAMS Set To Honor Amosun, Others At 70th Founder’s Anniversary

Published

on

By

 

As African Church Grammar School Abeokuta is set to celebrate its 70th Anniversary, former governor of Ogun state, Senator Ibikunle Amosun FCA CON, is among prominent individuals set to be honoured during the week-long activities of the establishment of the school.

 

Founded in 1955 by the African Church Mission, the school, which is “famous for high standard”, has produced prominent individuals who have excelled in their various field of endeavours. It is in recognition of this that National Executive Council of the Old Students Association of the school has come up with a series of engaging events, including Career Talk, Award presentation, Projects commissioning to herald its 2025 Annual General Meeting.

 

Located in Ita Iyalode, directly opposite the residence of the former Nigerian president – Chief Olusegun Obasanjo, the institution remains a cornerstone of academic excellence in Ogun State.

 

In a statement jointly signed by the Old Students Association’s National President – Dr. Babatunde Akinsola and General Secretary – Alhaji Lion Shafih Adeyemi Amusa, the celebration will start from Tuesday, 18th February 2025, to Sunday, 23rd February, 2025.

 

Activities marking the event will include a career talk for students, a literary and debating competition, a novelty football match between old students and teachers, and a Jumat service at Owu Central Mosque while a Church service also follows at African Church, Idi-Ape, Abeokuta.

 

Other highlights include suya night, presentation of a 10-year master plan, commissioning of new projects, awards ceremony, and elections of new officers.

 

The anniversary, which also aims to reunite past students, celebrates the school’s achievements, and set a vision for its future will see other prominent Alumni get awards from the National Executive Council of the Old Students Association. Among the Awardees are, Hon. Oyetunde Ojo – the Chairman of Federal Housing Authority, Chief Biodun Agbaje – a businessman and philanthropist, Dr. Mutiu O. Agboke Esq – Resident Electoral Commissioner (Osun State), Mr. Bayo Olujimi Ogundimu – a reputable administrator and former Registrar of D S Adegbenro ICT Polytechnic, Mr. Bola Badmus – a financial expert and consultant, and Dr. Tokunbo Sowunmi – a medical doctor based in the UK.

 

 

The Old Students Association remains committed to ensuring the continued growth and development of their alma mater.

Continue Reading

News and Report

Court reschedules hearing in Ganduje bribery case

Published

on

By

The Kano State High Court in Kano, North-west Nigeria, on Thursday, fixed 15 April to hear objections to the charges pending against a former governor of the state, Abdullahi Ganduje, who is the current national chairperson of the All Progressives Congress (APC).

The Cable reports that, in the case, the Kano State Government charged Mr Ganduje; his wife, Hafsat; son, Umar Abdullahi Umar; and five others, with eight counts of bribery, misappropriation, and diversion of public funds.

The rest of the defendants are Abubakar Bawuro, Jibrilla Muhammad, Lamash Properties Limited, Safari Textiles Limited, and Lasage General Enterprises Limited.

Based on defence lawyers’ request on Thursday, trial judge Amina Adamu-Aliyu rescheduled proceedings for the hearing of the notices of preliminary objection filed against the charges by the defendants.
Earlier at the proceedings on Thursday, the prosecution led by Adeola Adedipe, told the court that he was ready for the hearing of the defendants’ notices of preliminary objection.

Mr Ganduje’s lawyer, Lydia Oluwakemi-Oyewo, similarly expressed readiness for the hearing of the applications.

However, Adekunle Taiye-Falola, the counsel for the 3rd and 7th defendant, said he was not ready to move his preliminary objection.

He said he needed to first regularise his client’s processes filed out of time.

On the other hand, Sunusi Musa, the fifth defendant’s lawyer noted that he had also filed a motion on notice for extension of time since 7 January. He urged the court to grant the application.

The sixth defendant’s lawyer, Abubakar Ahmed, said he filed a notice of preliminary objection as far back as 9 September 2024, and was ready to proceed.

Also, the eighth defendant’s lawyer, Ibrahim Aliyu-Nasarawa, told the court he was not ready to move his application, adding that he intended to file and reply on points of law.

Following this scenario, the trial judge granted all the applications for extension of time and postponed the matter to 15 April for hearing of all pending preliminary objections.

The Kano State Government accused Mr Ganduje in the charges of collecting $210,000 bribe from “people and entities seeking or holding the execution of Kano State Government contract and or project for the remodelling of Kantin Kwari textile market as a bribe through one of the contractors (agent)”.

Continue Reading

News and Report

Alleged N12 billion Fraud: EFCC demands Otudeko’s physical presence in court

Published

on

By

The counsel in the case of alleged fraud charge brought against the Chairman of Honeywell Group, Oba Otudeko, on Thursday, filed several preliminary objections to the suit before the Federal High Court in Lagos.

The preliminary objections from the accused were contested in court Thursday just as the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) demanded Mr Oba Otudeko’s physical presence in court at the next hearing.

The applications included those challenging the court’s jurisdiction to entertain the case, those asking for stay of arraignment, and those seeking quashing of the charge.

The EFCC had preferred a 13-count charge against Mr Otudeko and a former Managing Director of First Bank Plc., Olabisi Onasanya.

Also charged is a former member of the board of Honeywell Group, Soji Akintayo, and a firm, Anchorage Leisure Ltd.

The N6.2 billion fraud charge is marked FHC/L/20C/2025 and before Justice Chukwujekwu Aneke.

The case was scheduled for arraignment on 20 January, but the defendants were absent on the grounds that the EFCC had not served them with the charge.

Their counsel had argued that they only got “wind” of the case on the pages of newspapers.

The court consequently directed service of the charge by substituted means, and adjourned the case.

On Thursday, Rotimi Oyedepo (SAN) announced appearance for the EFCC and Wole Olanipekun (SAN) announced appearance for Mr Otudeko, while Olasupo Shashore (SAN) appeared for Mr Onasanya.

Kehinde Ogunwumiju (SAN) appeared for Akintayo, while Ade Adedeji (SAN) aanounced appearance for Anchorage Leisure Ltd.

Babajide Koku (SAN) announced appearance for the nominal complainant, First Bank of Nigeria.

Mr Olanipekun informed the court of an application he filed on behalf of Mr Otudeko and dated 28 January which he said was served on the EFCC on 29 January.

He also told the court that there was an affidavit dated 1st February which gave details of Mr Otudeko’s absence in court.

Other defence counsel briefly introduced their applications before the court.

In response, EFCC counsel told the court that he had complied with the court’s directive on substituted service of the charge on the first, third and fourth defendants and had attached a proof of service.

He also told the court that he received processes from Mr Olanipekun confirming that Mr Otudeko was not within the court’s jurisdiction.

Mr Oyedepo added that he received a “harvest of motions” from defence counsel in the suit, objecting to the suit.

He said it was important to know when the parties could return to the court for arraignment of the defendants since the first defendant was absent.

In response, Mr Olanipekun informed the court that he had served an application on the prosecution on behalf of Mr Otudeko, adding that the EFCC had seven days to reply.

He argued that a court had to, first, decide whether it had jurisdiction to entertain the case.

He urged the court to give a date for hearing of the defendants’ applications.

In response, Mr Oyedepo argued that the arraignment of the defendants ought to be taken first before any applications.

He cited the Court of Appeal’s decision in the case of Yahaya Bello as well as the provisions of Section 396(2) of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act (ACJA), 2015.

He submitted that the court should adjourn the case for arraignment of the defendants.

In further response, Mr Olanipekun argued that it was important for the parties to refrain from “pulling cases by a strand of hair”.

Citing judicial authorities decided after the enactment of the ACJA, including Federal Republic of Nigeria (FRN) versus Idahosa and Shema Ibrahim versus FRN, he argued that the court dispensed with the appearance of the defendants in both cases.

On his part, counsel to the third defendant, Mr Ogunwumiju, also argued that it was important for the court to first take the objection by the defence in the interest of justice.

Citing the provisions of Edet versus State as well as Section 412(3) of the ACJA, he submitted that arraigning the defendants before hearing their objections would be prejudicial.

In the same vein, counsel to the second defendant, Mr Shashore, urged the court to hear the applications of defence.

According to him, the fourth defendant seeks an application staying arraignment, and another quashing the charge.

He argued that it would be unfair to insist that the court take the defendants’ pleas to a charge that might eventually be quashed.

He added that it was important for the court to first decide whether there was merit in doing same.

Counsel to the fourth defendant, Mr Adedeji, argued on the authority of Nwadike versus FRN that court processes must not be made to oppress citizens.

He argued that the case of Yahaya Bello as cited by the prosecution was not relevant to the suit, neither was the provisions of Section 396(3) of ACJA.

Mr Adedeji said the defendants ought not to face fraud trial for a civil transaction.

In reply, Mr Oyedepo said the cases cited by defence counsel were out of context and did not reflect the charge.

He urged the court to make an order directing Mr Otudeko to be present in court on the next adjourned date.

At this point, Mr Olanipekun informed the court that Mr Otudeko was under medical review and was advised to remain in the United Kingdom until a comprehensive review and medical advice.

He urged the court not to make such an order but to adjourn the case for hearing of the applications.

The judge adjourned the case until March 17 for ruling on the arguments.

(NAN)

Continue Reading

Trending