Justice Olabisi Ogungbesan of the Lagos State High Court, sitting at Tafawa Balewa Square (TBS), will rule on September 26, 2024, on Pan Atlantic University’s legal status.
The judge will also determine whether the University is a juristic entity that can be sued.
Justice Ogungbesan fixed the date after hearing arguments from Chief Uche Ihediwa (SAN), counsel to the claimant, and A.O. Okafor, lawyer to the defendants.
The claimant, Prof. Nduka Otiono, had dragged Mrs Josephine Effah-Chukwuma, wife of a former regional director of the Ford Foundation, Innocent Chukwuma, and the Pan-Atlantic University, before the court over the biography of her late husband, titled “Possibilities Unlimited—A Biography of Innocent Chukwuma.”
Otiono in the suit, marked LD/10395GCMW/2023, prayed to the court for a declaration that the defendants breached the contract terms when they failed to approve the manuscript within 30 days by the 14th day of March 2023.
He also urged the court to declare the Defendants’ letter dated May 8, 2023, purporting to terminate the contract between the parties as wrongful, illegal, null and void.
At the resumed hearing on Friday, counsel to the defendants urged the court to strike out the name of the 2nd defendant (Pan-Atlantic University) from the suit for being not a person known to the law and incapable of being sued.
Okafor’s application was brought under Order 15 Rule 17 (1) and Order 43 Rule 1 of the High Court of Lagos State (Civil Procedure) Rules, 2019 and Section 6(6) of the Constitution.
He submitted that no existing legal entity or person is known as Pan Atlantic University (Proprietor of Lagos Business School) or “Pan Atlantic University,” as presented in the respondent’s originating processes.
He argued that the Lagos Business School and the Lagos Business School Sustainability Programme are not legal entities or juristic persons capable of being sued.
Opposing the application, Chief Ihediwa argued that the rules of the court do not bestow juristic personalities on corporate entities, adding that statutes confer juristic personality.
He submitted that the court rules merely provide for how categories of juristic persons may be sued.
In his statement of claims, the claimant, Prof. Otiono, stated that around mid-2021, the 1st defendant (and representatives of the Ford Foundation, West Africa) approached him and offered him a ghost-writer proposal through a Request for Proposal document.
The claimant averred that on or about November 2021, he negotiated a contract with the Defendants to write a 75—100,000 Biography of Late Innocent Chukwuma – titled “Possibilities Unlimited – A Biography of late Innocent Chukwuma”
The claimant stated that executing the assignment involved the engagement of assistants, extensive travel within and outside Nigeria, research and analysis of materials on the late Innocent Chukwuma’s life and times, reviewing the work of the deceased, conducting several interviews, and identifying contributions to civil society, criminal justice reform, youth and women’s rights, among other things.
The claimant averred that the Ford Foundation funded the project through the Defendants.
The claimant stated that the consideration for the project was $37,779.00 (Thirty-Seven Thousand, Seven Hundred and Seventy-Nine United States Dollars). The Defendants paid the Claimant Seventy per cent (70%) of the agreed sum, which amounted to $26,445.3 (Twenty-Six Thousand, Four Hundred and Forty-Five United States Dollars and Three Cents), leaving a balance of $11,333.7 (Eleven Thousand, Three Hundred and Thirty-Three United States Dollars and Seven Cents) or Thirty per cent (30%) of the contract sum.
The claimant further stated that by paragraph 8 of the Terms of Reference, the parties agreed that the balance of the 30 per cent was to be paid “within 30 days of the accomplishment of the project as, irrespective of whether the 1st defendant has gone through the work in 30 days or not.”
The claimant stated that he submitted the manuscript to the 1st defendant on February 7, 2022, adding that the 1st Defendant reviewed the manuscript in 27 days and returned it to him with her comments.
The 2nd defendant also reviewed the manuscript and returned it to the Claimant for revision.
The claimant averred that he revised the original manuscript incorporating relevant views of the 1st Defendant (the Approver) and the 2nd Defendant (the project manager) and returned the completed work to the Defendants on 14th March 2022.
The claimant stated that by the Terms of Reference, the Ist defendant had 30 days from the 14th day of March 2023 to review the revised manuscript. The parties equally understood that after thirty (30) days from the 14th day of March 2023, the Claimant would be entitled to the outstanding contractual sum and regard the project as completed.
The claimant averred that after the time limit for reviewing the draft expired, the defendants sent a letter dated 8th May 2023 purportedly terminating the contract.
The defendants alleged that the Claimant breached the terms of reference by posting a Facebook celebration of Innocent Chukwuma on the second anniversary of his demise by the claimant.
We’ve got the edge. Get real-time reports, breaking scoops, and exclusive angles delivered straight to your phone. Don’t settle for stale news. Join LEADERSHIP NEWS on WhatsApp for 24/7 updates →
Join Our WhatsApp Channel
