Judicial reprieve came the way of the Federal
Airports Authority of Nigeria (FAAN) and its Managing Director, George Uriesi
as a Federal High Court in Lagos dismissed a contempt charge preferred against
them by an aviation services firm and former concessionaire of the
authority, Maevis Ltd.
The contempt charge was dismissed by Justice Ibrahim Buba on the ground that the application was defective.
Justice Buba who took over the case following the withdrawal of the former judge, Justice Binta Murtala Nyako, also noted that since the case was starting afresh under him, he needed time to study the preliminary objection of FAAN against the application.
This ruling brings to an end the protracted case filed against Uriesi by Maevis to challenge FAAN's termination of the Airport Operations Management System (AOMS) concession that was managed by the company.
It will be recalled that the former judge in charge of the case, Justice Nyako had transferred the suit to the Chief Judge of the court for re-assignment to another judge.
Justice Nyako had equally overruled the objection of Maevis with regard to an appeal lodged by FAAN to challenge the jurisdiction of the court to entertain the suit saying the authority is free to pursue the appeal.
Maevis, had filed the substantive suit against FAAN over alleged breach of contract for the provision of AOMS platform in four international airports in Lagos, Abuja, Kano and Port Harcourt.
The firm later filed a contempt proceeding over an allegation that FAAN disregarded an order of the court made on September 24, 2010, for the maintenance of the status quo on the concession contract.
Following the alleged disobedience of the court order, Maevis' lawyer, Prof Yemi Osinbajo (SAN), urged the court to commit Uriesi to prison saying the alleged disobedience of the court order by FAAN's MD was an affront to the court.
He urged the court not to condone the action of the MD by sending him to prison to serve as a deterrent to other government officials.
But in his counter application, FAAN's counsel, Kola Awodein (SAN), described the contempt proceeding as incompetent for not complying with the rules of court, which requires that the order of court accompanying form 48 be signed and not attached.
The contempt charge was dismissed by Justice Ibrahim Buba on the ground that the application was defective.
Justice Buba who took over the case following the withdrawal of the former judge, Justice Binta Murtala Nyako, also noted that since the case was starting afresh under him, he needed time to study the preliminary objection of FAAN against the application.
This ruling brings to an end the protracted case filed against Uriesi by Maevis to challenge FAAN's termination of the Airport Operations Management System (AOMS) concession that was managed by the company.
It will be recalled that the former judge in charge of the case, Justice Nyako had transferred the suit to the Chief Judge of the court for re-assignment to another judge.
Justice Nyako had equally overruled the objection of Maevis with regard to an appeal lodged by FAAN to challenge the jurisdiction of the court to entertain the suit saying the authority is free to pursue the appeal.
Maevis, had filed the substantive suit against FAAN over alleged breach of contract for the provision of AOMS platform in four international airports in Lagos, Abuja, Kano and Port Harcourt.
The firm later filed a contempt proceeding over an allegation that FAAN disregarded an order of the court made on September 24, 2010, for the maintenance of the status quo on the concession contract.
Following the alleged disobedience of the court order, Maevis' lawyer, Prof Yemi Osinbajo (SAN), urged the court to commit Uriesi to prison saying the alleged disobedience of the court order by FAAN's MD was an affront to the court.
He urged the court not to condone the action of the MD by sending him to prison to serve as a deterrent to other government officials.
But in his counter application, FAAN's counsel, Kola Awodein (SAN), described the contempt proceeding as incompetent for not complying with the rules of court, which requires that the order of court accompanying form 48 be signed and not attached.
In urging the court to dismiss the application,
Awodein said the alleged disobedience of court order must be proven beyond any
doubt contending that there is a legitimate doubt in the order as the court was
not exact in ordering party to maintain the res.
According to him, the defendant did not know whether maintaining the res amounts to sustaining the suit since the plaintiff did not seek any restraining reliefs in its suit.
According to him, the defendant did not know whether maintaining the res amounts to sustaining the suit since the plaintiff did not seek any restraining reliefs in its suit.
No comments:
Post a Comment