Justice Akintayo Aluko of the Federal High Court, Lagos has fixed June 6, to decide on the next steps to be taken on the hearing of applications, in the bankruptcy action filed against the Chairman of Honeywell Group, Dr Oba Otudeko by Ecobank.
Justice Aluko’s decision was Sequel to the argument canvassed by Ecobank’s counsel, Mr Kunle Ogunba (SAN), who informed the court that Ecobank has withdrawn the appeal it earlier filed in the case, following a judgment of the Supreme Court on a sister case which has rendered the said appeal from the court a mere academic.
Ogunba said following the apex court’s decision delivered in favour of Ecobank on 27th January, 2023, “we filed a notice of discontinuance of our appeal emanating from this suit, at the Supreme Court.”
The lawyer however promised to provide before the court the relevant evidence to show the court how that judgement which Supreme court has delivered affects the present case.
He therefore prayed the court to grant a further adjournment to a new date for hearing of pending applications, in view of the discontinuance of the appeal.
Responding, Otudeko’s counsel, Faith Adarighifua opposed his application, arguing that the Supreme Court had not pronounced on the notice of discontinuance with respect to this case .
She argued further that the Supreme court needs to make a pronouncement on the notice of discontinuance and until when that is done the proper thing is to adjourn this suit. She also argued that the court should follow the court of appeal judgement that says their preliminary objection should be heard first and alone.
She lamented that there are several cases that scattered in different courts which are still in contention and the judgment of the Supreme court is only in one, which is different from the present one before the court.
She prayed the court to adjourn for hearing of their objection in line with the judgment of the Court of Appeal.
The presiding judge subsequently adjourned the matter till June 6 to enable him review the issues and make an informed decision on the procedure to adopt, in line with the decisions of the appellate court.
