A Federal High Court, Abuja, on Tuesday, fixed July 15 for judgment in three suits filed against former Chairman of PDP, Uche Secondus, and two others, seeking an order restraining them from attending party’s executive meetings.
Justice Inyang Ekwo fixed the date after lawyers to the parties adopted their processes and argued their case for and against the suit.
The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that three PDP members in Rivers had filed three separate suits against Secondus; sacked Governor of Rivers, Celestine Omehia, and former Deputy Speaker of the House of Representatives, Austin Opara.
The suit against Secondus and seven others, marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/440/2024, was filed by Titus Jones.
The second against Omehia and five others, marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/436/2024 was filed by Precious Wobisike, while the third, marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/438/2024 against Opara and seven others, was filed by Chisa Amadi.
NAN reports that the judge had, on April 5, issued ex-parte orders, which among others, restrain the three PDP chieftains from attending any meeting of the National Executive Committee (NEC) and/or Board of Trustees (BoT) of the party, pending the hearing and determination of the substantive suit.
Justice Ekwo restrained them from participating in deliberations or proceedings of the meetings in any manner after the plaintiffs’ counsel, Joshua Musa, SAN, moved the motion to the effect.
But Secondus, Omehia and Opara had applied that the execution of the orders be stayed pending the determination of the appeals they filed, challenging the ex-parte orders.
However, Justice Ekwo, in a ruling, dismissed their applications seeking to set aside the interim order on the ground that their motions for stay of execution of the order were wrongly filed and therefore, incompetent. READ ALSO:
- Fintech regulations: SEC pledges transparency, fairness
- $1.4m Fraud: Appeal Court Upholds Conviction of Businessman
- Tinubu holds first presidential media chat tonight
- Africa Magic Opens Entries For 11th AMVCA
- Of Hunger Pollutions And No Solutions: A Clarion Call To Stop Further Death Toll
The judge held that under Order 26(9)(1) of the Federal High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules (FHCCPR) 2019, what Secondus, Omehia and Opara ought to do was to apply to the court to either vary or discharge the orders, not to apply for stay.
The judge said: “By Order 26 (9) (1) of the FHCCPR 2019, it is provided that where an order is made on a motion ex -parte, any person affected by it may, within seven days after service of it, or within such further time as the court shall allow, apply to the court by motion to vary or discharge it.”(NAN)
