The court imposed fines on the NDP, Gbadamosi
A Federal High Court meeting in Lagos fined an opposition candidate from the People’s Democratic Party (PDP) during a by-election in the eastern Lagos Senatorial District last Saturday, Babatunde Gbadamosi.
Judge Chuka Obiozor imposed a $ 20,000 fine following the withdrawal of a motion filed by attorney Gabadamoshi Ebun-Olu Adegboruwa (San Francisco) to disqualify election winner Mr. Tokunbo Abiru of the All Progressives Congress (APC).
The judge granted the status of the application by Abiru’s lawyer, Mr. A. Kemi Pinheiro SAN, and ordered the payment of N10,000 to APC and another N10,000 to Mr. Abiru.
At the last hearing of the lawsuit, the court similarly fined the PDP candidate for 40,000 AD, which includes the cost of 20,000 AD. updated all interim issues, including APC’s objection to the claim.
Abiru’s suitability for the survey is disputed by the PDP and Gbadamosi, the first and second participants respectively.
But in their objections, Abiru and APC, among other things, challenge the court’s jurisdiction to hear the case on the grounds that it is prescribed by law because it was not filed within the 14 days provided for in Section 285 (9). The Constitution
The Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC), Abiru and PCA are respectively the first and third accused in the case.
The trial began with Pinheiro, who identified two outstanding issues. The first was the question of the 2nd respondent dated November 11, 2020 with a request to be allowed to submit a response on questions of law to the plaintiff’s written address dated November 3, 2020, which did not object. The same was moved and granted when praying.
The second instance is dated November 30, 2020 with a request to be allowed to file additional affidavits and answer questions of law in response to the plaintiff’s litigations that object to the second respondent’s request to cancel the additional and better affidavits of November 9, 2020. Pinheiro moved in terms of movement, since no one disputed him. The same was granted when they prayed.
Adegboruwa identified a simultaneous original quotation and a question requiring a change in the original quotation.
On seeing Pinheiro’s objection to the amendment proposal, the court questioned the adequacy of Adegboruwa’s amendment request, as it felt that the plaintiff did not have time to amend.
Pinheiro reiterated that the amendment should be made within the time frame for the filing of initial hearings under section 285 of the Constitution.
With this in mind, Adegboruwa agreed to move the original credit link and requested that the change request be withdrawn.
Pinheiro told the court that he had responded to the amendment proposal, adding that costs had been incurred in responding to the amendment request, and asked for their cost.
He asked the court to reject the amendment motion rather than quash it. He also drew the court’s attention to the fact that on November 16, 2020, the applicants withdrew a similar statement, which was deleted.
The lawyer informed the court that the previous application was identical to the application in question at the time the request was withdrawn and that less than 48 hours had elapsed since the first application was canceled when the second was filed.
According to him, the entire trial of November 16 was related to the corresponding court order regarding the first request for amendments.
He also stated that the plaintiff also filed another trial on November 9, 2020, titled “A further and better affidavit.”
He called on the court to award the plaintiffs compensation in the amount of N 500,000. E.
In his decision, the judge noted that the plaintiff’s motion was aimed at doing something that was not permitted by the rules of his case. Therefore, he rejected the proposed amendment. He also charged the 2nd and 3rd defendants with a cost of NN 10,000 each. E. To everyone.
Following the rejection of the amendment proposal, Plaintiffs withdrew their original corrected citation, which was deleted.
Source: – Chaannels Tv