The Federal High Court Chief Judge and the National Judicial Council have been asked to look into circumstances surrounding the arbitrary transfer of their cases and the abuse of ex-parte orders to ground their investments in Nigeria.
In a petition submitted to the office of the Chief Judge in Abuja on Tuesday November 12, 2024, Edmark Group protested against the ex-parte orders granted by Honourable Justice C. Aneke in 2022 which have paralyzed their businesses and operations in Nigeria.
A copy of the petition written through the solicitors of Edmark Group, Ebun-Olu Adegboruwa SAN & Co and which was acknowledged in the office of the Chief Judge in Abuja.
Recall that a minority shareholder, Mr. Anthony Etim Maurice, claiming just 5% unpaid shares of the company, had approached the Federal High Court, Lagos in May 2022 and through his lawyers he secured blanket ex-parte orders to appoint a receiver/manager to take over a company in which he plays no significant role. Lamenting this development, the Edmark Group stated in the petition as follows:
“Suddenly in May 2022, Mr. Etim Maurice Anthony invaded the headquarters of Edmark Direct Marketing with Mr. Seyi Akinwunmi and officers of the Federal High Court, they chased out members of staff and padlocked all the offices of the company. It turned out that Mr. Etim Maurice Anthony had secured a blanket ex-parte order from Honourable Justice C. Aneke, to attach all the assets of the company and to appoint a receiver/manager for the company, which company was not a debtor to anybody. Mr. Anthony did all this on the strength of his claim of 5% unpaid share capital in Edmark Direct Marketing. Thus, since May 2022, the company has been totally paralyzed and all its business operations and activities grounded. All expatriate members of staff have been chased out of Nigeria. Based on the petition of Edmark Group, the case was eventually transferred from Honourable Justice C. Aneke to Honourable Justice D. Osiagor. The said Ex-parte orders are attached as Exhibit A Series.”
The petition stated further that the case has been heard and determined at the instance of the petitioner, Mr. Anthony, when he moved the court (Osiagor J) to appoint an auditor to conduct a forensic audit to determine the value of his 5% unpaid shares in order to be paid and to exit the company. In a twist of events, Mr. Anthony alleged bias against the same judge that granted his request and thereafter filed an application for the judge to recuse himself from the case, which application was heard and dismissed. Mr. Anthony was alleged to have subsequently by-passed the court process to apply to the administrative judge to transfer the case on the alleged indisposition of the presiding judge.
“Suddenly, the Petitioner wrote a letter to the Administrative Judge of the Lagos Division of the Court, requesting for a transfer of the case on the ground of indisposition of the presiding judge. First, the presiding judge had earlier on delivered a considered ruling dismissing the Petitioner’s request for recusal and transfer of the case. Second, there is an appeal pending against the said ruling. Third, the Petition had been heard and determined substantively, only awaiting the report of the auditor. Fourth, the court had given notice that the presiding judge was set to resume sitting on all his cases. Thus, there was no basis for the request for transfer of the case to another court.”
