On Monday, the Makurdi High Court reviewed a motion filed by Matthew Burkaa, legal representative for the All Progressives Congress (APC).
Burkaa, accompanied by fellow lawyers Dangana and others, presented their case to the court.
It is important to note that the court had previously extended the duration of an interim order by seven days on 28th August 2024.
This extension set the stage for the proceedings that unfolded on Monday.
During the session, Burkaa, who is a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), submitted and served multiple legal documents to M.T. Alyebo Esq. Alyebo, representing the interests of Agada and other applicants, appeared alongside E.E. Igbighogho.
Despite receiving these additional affidavits from Burkaa, Alyebo agreed to address the motion concerning the potential overturning of the restraining order.
The crux of the motion revolved around the argument that the originating motion was not signed.
Burkaa’s team contended that an interim injunction issued based on an unsigned originating motion should be invalidated.
Alyebo, defending the Benue APC chairman Agada, countered by asserting that the originating motion had indeed been properly signed by S.O.S. Napoleon Esq.
He directed the court’s attention to the judge’s copy of the originating motion, arguing that it was this copy that would determine the validity of the signatures.
Alyebo maintained that, even if the copy presented by the SAN appeared unsigned, the existence of a mark adjacent to the name of S.O.S. Napoleon on that document was sufficient for validation.
He supported his argument by citing the case of GTB v. INNOSON Nig Ltd, where the Supreme Court established that a legal process is considered valid with a signature or a mark placed either against or above the name of the lawyer.
Alyebo’s point was that the presence of such a mark made the process valid, regardless of other copies that may have been unsigned.
After considering the submissions from both parties, Justice Theresa Igoche decided to adjourn the matter.
The court is now scheduled to deliver its ruling on 10th September 2024.
This case highlights a critical issue regarding procedural validity and the formalities required for legal processes in Nigerian courts.
The outcome could have significant implications for how legal documents are handled and the enforcement of interim injunctions in similar cases.
Support InfoStride News' Credible Journalism: Only credible journalism can guarantee a fair, accountable and transparent society, including democracy and government. It involves a lot of efforts and money. We need your support. Click here to Donate