Connect with us
Advertise With Us

NEWS

Court Fixes July 22 To Hear Oando Suit Against SEC

Published

on

Justice Ayokunle Faji of the Federal high court in Lagos on Thursday adjourned the four cases filed by the embattled Group Chief Executive Officer of Oando Plc, Wale Tinubu and some directors of the company against Securities Exchange commission (SEC), challenging their sack till July 22.

On that date, the court will hear all pending preliminary applications and the substantive suit.

Among the pending applications to be heard during vacation, are preliminary objection to determine either the court has jurisdiction to hear and determine the case or not, filed by Chief Anthony Idigbe (SAN) on behalf of SEC and an application to consolidate the multiple suits filed on behalf of the defendants, filed by Yele Delano (SAN).

The court also ordered Chief Idigbe to within five days to file his response to the applications, while Delano appearing for Tinubu and others was also given five days after which he must have been served, to file his reply.

However, the proceedings would be conducted by a vacation judge since Justice Faji will be on vacation from  8th July till 13th September, 2019.

Tinubu, and his Deputy, Omamofe Boyo had filed the suit seeking enforcement of their Fundamental Rights to fair hearing and to reverse their sack.

Already Justice Mojisola Olatoregun had granted an order stopped SEC from imposing a fine on Tinubu and carrying out its decision to remove him and his deputy, Omamofe Boyo from being directors of public companies for five years.

The court also restrained Sumonu from acting as Head of Oando’s interim management team, pending the hearing and determination of the motion.

The court had urged parties to maintain the status quo pending the determination of the motion on notice.

In its preliminary objection, SEC is urging the court to dismiss  the suit  filed by Tinubu and  Boyo on the following grounds of objection.

“Want of subject matter of jurisdiction.

“Non compliance with condition precedent prescribed by the investment and Securities Act, no, 29, 2007 for instituting an action against the respondent.

“Failure to exhaust administrative remedy available to the plaintiffs.

“That the suit as presently constituted is incompetent and an abuse of the process of the court.”

“The Plaintiffs have commenced the action for enforcement of fundamental rights jointly which constitutes a materials breach to the Fundamental rights enforcement rules.

“The entire action is Frivolous, vexations, malicious, tantamount to forum shopping, an abusive use of the processes of the court, with the aim of interfering with the SEC’s discharge of regulatory duties and responsibilities.”

 

Advertisement
Comments

MOST POPULAR

%d bloggers like this: