Connect with us

Judiciary

Court rejects objection in N1bn Pinnacle vs ICPC suit, imposes N100,000 fine

Published

on


Justice Taiwo Taiwo of the Federal High Court, Abuja, on Friday dismissed a preliminary objection by Zenith Bank challenging a suit filed by Pinnacle Communications Ltd (PCL) against the Independent Corrupt Practices and other related offences Commission (ICPC), and the commercial bank.

adron lemon friday

Pinnacle Communications had in July 2018, dragged ICPC and Zenith bank to court for unlawfully withholding its money domicile in the bank without a valid court order, and consequently, is claiming N1billion damages against the agency.

Delivering ruling on the objection of Zenith Bank (2nd defendant), the court said the application lacked merit, was frivolous and incompetent.

Justice Taiwo held that Okey Ojukwu, counsel to the commercial bank ought not to have filed the preliminary objection in the first place because the December 14, 2018, judgement of Justice Nnamdi Dimgba, which voided and nullified the freezing of account of Pinnacle Communications domicile in the bank was explicit and unambiguous.

Ojukwu had in the preliminary objection of the bank claimed that the action it took by withholding the account of PCL was a “lawful act”.

Justice Taiwo said the objection by the bank was filed out of misconception and only amounted to a waste of the court’s precious time.

“The application of the second defendant is an invitation to this court to sit on appeal on the decision of my learned brother Dimgba J. of Dec.14, 2018.

“This court, with all due respect to the second defendant shall not fall into that error.
“The application is not only incompetent and an abuse of court process, it is one brought without carefully and painstakingly understanding the ruling my learned brother gave on the interlocutory injunction”, Justice Taiwo held.
Consequently, the Judge reasoned that “This type of application should be discouraged by the court and counsel, and to discourage counsel from filing such frivolous application, the court must come down hard on counsel who filed such applications either on their own or on the instruction of their client”.
“I therefore find no merit in this application and it is accordingly dismissed having held that the application is frivolous, time wasting, incompetent and an abuse of court process.

“I shall fail in my duty as a judge if I do not award cost. Therefore, I award N100,000 against the second defendant in favour of the plaintiff” Justice Taiwo stated.
By the suit marked FHC/ABJ/CS/779/18, Pinnacle Communications is seeking “A declaration that the act of the 1st defendant (ICPC) in ordering the 3rd defendant to place a “post-no-debit” restrictions on the plaintiff’s account with the 2nd defendant without any court order and or any valid court order is ultra vires, unlawful, injurious, unconstitutional and a breach of the plaintiff’s right to its movable property.
The plaintiff is also seeking, “A declaration that the act of the 2nd defendant in placing a “post-no-debit” restrictions on the plaintiffs account number 1012875804 with the 3rd defendant without any court order and or any valid order is unlawful, injurious, unconstitutional and a breach of the plaintiff’s right to its movable property.
More so, PCL wants, “A declaration that the failure of the 2nd defendant to right the wrongful act of the first defendant in ordering a “post no debit” restrictions on the plaintiff’s account with the 2nd defendant without a valid court order is unlawful, illegal, unconstitutional and a breach of the plaintiff’s right to its movable property.
Furthermore, the plaintiff is seeking “An order of perpetual injunction restraining the defendant from placing any restrictions on plaintiff’s account with the 2nd defendant without a valid and competent court order.
“An order of perpetual injunction restraining the 1st defendant from placing any form of restrictions on the plaintiff’s account with the 2nd defendant and or any other bank or financial institution in which the plaintiff maintains any account and or dealings, without a court order and or valid and competent court order.
“An order for the payment of the one billion naira as general, exemplary and punitive damages against the defendant for their unlawful and illegal act.

Continue Reading

Judiciary

Absence of Regina Daniel’s Friend, Izuegbu Stalls arraignment Over ‘Illegal Substances, Criminal Defamation

Published

on

By

The absence of Ms Anthonet Izuegbu, friend of estranged wife of Senator Ned Nwoko, Regina Daniels has stalled her arraignment over a case of Defamation and allegedly routinely sourced, handled, and administered controlled and illegal substances to Regina and associated individuals preferred against her.

adron lemon friday

When the matter which is before Justice Ekerete Akpan of the Federal High Court Abuja, came up for arraignment on Thursday, July 16 2026, the defendant who collapsed during last arraignment was absent in court and the case was consequently adjourned to September 15, 2026.

Recall that Ms Izuegbu also known as “Ann” was arrested for criminal defamation against Senator Nwoko.

The Ned Nwoko media team, in a statement made available to the News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) stated that contrary to the misleading and inflammatory narratives being circulated across social media platforms, Izuegbu was arrested in connection with criminal defamation against the lawmaker.

The team explained that Izuegbu was arrested in connection with criminally defamatory statements she publicly made, alleging that the lawmaker physically assaulted his wife, Mrs Laila Nwoko, which resulted in a miscarriage.

“These claims are entirely false as no such incident occurred, and no miscarriage resulted from any alleged violence.

“The statements were made without evidence and form part of a coordinated attempt to reinforce previously circulated and unsubstantiated domestic violence allegations,” the team said.

The team also said that Izuegbu was implicated in the procurement of an illegal abortion for Regina Daniels, during her lawful marriage to the Nwoko.

According to the team, the incident occurred after the marriage, notwithstanding subsequent attempts to reframe the timeline.

“The legality of the act does not change based on narrative adjustments. The matter is on record and has previously been publicly referenced by Regina herself,” the statement said.

The team added that a formal witness statement dated Oct. 29, 2025 submitted to the Area Commander, Maitama Police Station, detailed repeated ongoing activities involving Izuegbua and others.

According to the team, the statement noted that Izuegbu allegedly routinely sourced, handled, and administered controlled and illegal substances to Regina and associated individuals.

The team further said that Izuegbu’s arrest was directly preceded by a public social media post in which she allegedly issued threats, made derogatory remarks, and repeated defamatory accusations against Mrs Laila Nwoko and the lawmaker.

“This post constituted provocation, intimidation, and criminal defamation under application law.

“It is important to emphasise that this matter is not a social media dispute but a law-enforcement issue grounded in evidence, witness testimonies, and due process.

“Any attempt to mischaracterize the arrest as suppression or victimisation is false and misleading,’’ the team added.


42
/ 100


SEO Score

Continue Reading

Judiciary

Oceangate Engineering to appeal court’s ruling on asset forfeiture

Published

on

By

Oceangate Engineering Oil & Gas Limited has announced plans to appeal a recent ruling of the Federal High Court ordering the forfeiture of certain assets.

adron lemon friday

The company’s Secretary, Nnenna Onyeaso, disclosed this in a statement on Thursday, maintaining that neither the firm nor its leadership was found guilty of any wrongdoing.

Onyeaso said the company views the ruling as a civil asset forfeiture order based on suspicion rather than proof, she emphasise  that the judgment did not establish any criminal liability against the organisation.

She added that the firm has instructed its legal team to file an appeal, expressing confidence in the judicial process and optimism that a comprehensive review of the case will yield a favourable outcome.

“To be clear, this ruling is a civil asset forfeiture order with no finding of wrongdoing against Oceangate or its leadership.

“The court’s decision rested on a legal standard of suspicion, not proof, and it is one we intend to pursue fully through the appeals process,” she said in a statement.

The firm secretary also said that Oceangate has reiterated its belief in the rule of law, noting that the appellate system exists to address such outcomes.

She added that the company remained confident that the facts of the case will ultimately affirm its integrity and business practices.

Onyeaso said that the firm also emphasised that its operations remained unaffected, stating that it continues to provide employment for many Nigerians while contributing to the country’s energy sector and broader economy.

“We have always believed in the ability of the judicial process, and that belief has not wavered,” she added.

She noted that Oceangate further expressed appreciation to its employees, partners, and clients for their continued support amid the development, assuring stakeholders of its commitment to transparency and accountability.

The Secretary said that the company reaffirmed its confidence in Nigeria as a viable destination for investment, describing the country as a land of equity, growth, and opportunity.

“We remain committed to the continued growth of our business and the communities we serve as we are optimistic that justice will prevail at the end of the legal process.


43
/ 100


SEO Score

Continue Reading

News

PDP Criticises Kwara Governor Over Deadly Bandit Attack

Published

on

PDP criticises Kwara Governor AbdulRahman AbdulRazaq over deadly bandit attack in Woro and Nuku, calling response insufficient

(more…)

adron lemon friday


67
/ 100


SEO Score

Continue Reading

Trending News