Court strikes out suit against former FAAN concessionaire, awards N3.15m against claimants

Justice Yellim Bogoro of a Federal High Court sitting in Lagos, on Thursday, struck out a suit filed against a former concessionaire of the Federal Airports Authority of Nigeria (FAAN), Integrated Intelligent Imaging West Africa Limited, (iCUBE) and six others; the company’s managing director, Moyosola Niran Oladunni who is a former All Progressives Congress gubernatorial aspirant in Ondo State, the company secretary, Mr Kehinde Akingbola, and four banks for lack of diligent prosecution.

Justice Bogoro struck out the suit delineated FHC/L/CS/817/2021sequel to an oral application by Professor Joseph Abugu (SAN), counsel to the defendants and awarded a total punitive cost of N3.15 million against the seven applicants in the suit; Folusho Adeagbo; Bola Cole; Oluwole Tella; Jide Alufa; Wale Akomolafe; Toluwaleke Abajingin and Rotimi Aladesanmi.

At the resumed hearing of the suit, neither the applicants nor their counsel, Declean Kemdirim, was in court and Professor Abugu had informed the court that neither the applicants or their counsels had appeared in court since the suit was filed early last year.

However, a legal practitioner, O. N. Nwizu, informed the court that he was holding the brief of Declean Kemdirim as he is withdrawing from representing the applicants in the suit, urging the court to grant the application.

Professor Abugu had raised objection to the application for change of counsel but Justice Bogoro, citing a plethora of legal authorities, had granted the counsel’s withdrawal application.

ALSO READ FROM  NIGERIAN TRIBUNE

• Suspense As APC, PDP Governors Meet In Lagos
• I Had Sex With Sofiat Before We Cut Off Her Head, Removed Flesh From Her Thigh For Money Ritual —Lover Boy

Consequently, Professor Abugu had applied to the court to strike out the matter for lack of diligent prosecution, praying the court to issues a punitive cost against all the applicants.

“This matter was filed on July 1, 2021, and this is the fifth adjournment. The plaintiffs have never appeared in court and their counsel was never in court till today. The withdrawal application was just taken and granted, verified that the counsel has returned the case file since September 2021. It also shows that all the hearing notices issued by this court have been forwarded to the plaintiffs and this includes our letter dated December 8, 2021, informing the counsel of this day and precedence proceedings of this court, which the counsel acknowledged.

“It is therefore clear that the plaintiffs are not interested in this matter. I, therefore, urged the court to strike out or dismiss this suit for wants of diligent prosecution with punitive cost,” Professor Abugu noted.

Justice Bogoro in the ruling held that she is in total agreement with the submissions of the senior counsel, as the plaintiffs never came to court to prosecute their case and consequently struck out the suit for lack of diligent prosecution and awarded punitive cost of N200,000, against each of the Plaintiffs in favour of the first and second defendants. Earlier, the court had awarded a total cost of N250, 000 against each of the Plaintiffs in favour of the first and second defendants.

The plaintiffs in a motion on Notice filed before the court had asked for a declaration that the Annual General Meeting of the first defendant, Integrated Intelligent Imaging West Africa Limited, held on April 27, 2021, was not properly and duly convened and that by virtue of the inconclusive status of the said first AGM of the company, the said meeting cannot be relied upon as establishing the retirement of the Directors of the Company in accordance with Section 28 (1) of the Companies And Allied Matters Act, 2020, (The Act”) where the statutory re-election of any Director could not be held due to the disruption of the Meeting.

The plaintiffs also asked for a declaration that if however, it is established that all directors of the company validly retired at the said AGM, then, Moyosola Niran Oladumni (second defendant) cannot validly remain the Managing Director of the company.

They also asked for a declaration that the purported board resolution of the company dated June 15, 2021, jointly signed by the second and third defendants, changing the company’s bank mandate with the fourth to seventh defendants is null and void and of no effect whatsoever.

Marburg Virus: What You Need To Know About Disease Recently Detected In West Africa

Court strikes out suit against former FAAN concessionaire, awards N3.15m against claimants