Barbus & Company Nigeria Limited & Anor V. Mrs. Gladys Oyiboka Okafor-udeji (2018)

LAWGLOBAL HUB Lead Judgment Report

JOHN INYANG OKORO, J.S.C.

The Respondent herein, who was applicant at the trial Court, commenced an action at the Federal High Court, Lagos, by notice of an Originating Motion dated 30th August, 2004 and sought the following reliefs:-

“1. An order for the rectification of the Register of members of the 1st Respondent company by the entry of the name of the Application, Mr. Azuka Joseph Okafor-Udeji therein as the bonafide holder of 50% (one half) of the total shareholdings in the 1st Respondent company.

2. A Declaration that the 1st Respondent company was floated to take over the partnership business trading under the name and style of Barbus & Co., equally owned by both the Applicant and the 2nd Respondent, and did so take the same over since incorporation.
3. An order restraining the 2nd Respondent from parading himself and members of his immediate family or further parading himself and members of his immediate family as the owners, members and/or shareholders of the 1st Respondent Company to the exclusion of the applicant herein.

AND for such further and other orders as this

1

Honourable Court may deem fit to make in the circumstance.

The grounds of the application were stated by the applicant/Respondent.

The Respondent (as applicant) also filed a motion on notice for interlocutory injunction on same date being 30th August, 2004 praying for certain reliefs as contained at page 56 of the record. Both applications were supported respectively by 22 and 24 paragraph affidavit and Exhibits marked Ajo 1 – Ajo 16. The Appellants herein, who were respondents at the trial Court, on 19th November, 2004, filed a notice of preliminary objection to the originating motion on notice and counter affidavit to the motion on notice for interlocutory injunction. The 22 paragraph affidavit/counter affidavit had two exhibits marked PC – 1 and PC -2 annexed thereto. In reply, the respondent filed a further and better affidavit and counter affidavit both dated 15th December, 2004.

The Notice of Preliminary objection dated 19th November, 2004 sought to dismiss the suit on the following grounds:-

(a) That there was no reasonable cause of action.

(b) That the Respondent herein lacked the locus standi to institute the action.

2

(c) That the suit was not properly constituted.

(d) That the action is incompetent.