An FCT High Court sitting in Area 11, Abuja has fixed May 25, to rule on the actual law firm representing Mr Edet-Godwin Etim, an appellant in a suit filed against Mr Umo Eno, the Akwa-Ibom Governor-elect.
Justice Suleiman Belgore at the resumed hearing of Etim’s appeal also adjourned ruling on other preliminary objections arising from a lower court.
The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) report that the appellant had earlier filed a case before a Magistrates Court Wuse Zone 6, Abuja alleging a case of cheating and dishonesty perpetrated by the governor elect on him.
The appellant had claimed that when Eno was a Chief Executive Officer of a company he worked for, he had refused to pay him salaries and other entitlement.
In the substantive suit, the appellant was praying the court to stop the swearing-in of the governor elect come May 29.
Mr Paul Usoro (SAN), Counsel for Eno, informed the court that his team of lawyers had filed a supplementary record arising from the ruling of the lower court.
He said that the respondent had also filed further affidavit impugning the supplementary record of appeal filed on May 22.
He informed the court that the appellant had served on his team another affidavit titled “further affidavit impugning the supplementary record of the respondent.
Usoro said that the announcement of Mr Ibrahim Idris (SAN) as counsel for the appellant did not follow the rules of professional conduct.
According to him, the affidavit of the main issue was sworn to by one Chinyere Aputazie, the counsel who earlier represented the appellant.
Usoro said that the appellant should have noted earlier that Chinyere Aputazie was going to be a witness in the suit, instead of withdrawing her when the process on the matter was on.
He said that the law firm of “Law Icon, Solicitors and Notaries’’ where Chinyere Aputazie was working for should have done the honorable thing by first informing the court of change of counsel.
He said that there ought to be a formal notice to the court for a change of counsel, saying that this was a total bridge of rule of conduct of the law profession.
Mr Ibrahim Idris, who earlier announced his representation for the appellant, however withdrew the “further affidavit impugning the supplementary record of the respondent’’.
He argued that it was not the right of another party to tell what the appellant needed to do; adding that what the appellant had done by changing counsel had not violated the constitution.
“We conceived that Chinyere Aputazie is going to enter the witness box, Ibrahim Idris has been asked to lead this matter by “Law Icon, Solicitors and Notaries’’.
“I urged the court to discountenance the application of the respondent,’’ he said.
After listening to the argument of both parties’ lawyer, Justice Belgore adjourned the ruling until May 25.
Post A Comment: