Do you need a website for your business?
- ticket title
- Igbos are being marginalized and this is evidence – Reno Omokri
- Osinbajo sends POWERFUL message to Jonathan’s former godfather on his 90th birthday
- See how Obasanjo, Osinbajo, others attended the #Biafra50 event in Abuja (photos)
- List of TOP 10 coldest countries in the world
- Sad! Lady who wedded in 2016 and foresaw her death in January 2017 finally DIES (photos)
The Federal High Court in Lagos has adjourned till February 13, 2017 for further hearing in the N200m suit filed by the wife of ex-President Goodluck Jonathan, Patience, against the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission and six others.
The other defendants in the suit are Skye Bank Plc; a former Special Assistant to ex-President Jonathan on Domestic Affairs, Waripamo-Owei Dudafa; and four companies linked with Dudafa.
The companies are Pluto Property and Investment Company Ltd; Seagate Property Development and Investment Company Ltd; Trans Ocean Property and Investment Company Ltd; and Avalon Global Property Development Ltd.
Patience filed the suit to challenge the ‘No Debit Order’ placed by the EFCC on the accounts of the four companies domiciled with Skye Bank Plc.
The companies were linked with Dudafa.
The EFCC froze the $15,591,700 found in the companies’ accounts in July, 2016 in the course of investigating Dudafa for money laundering.
Patience, however, sued the EFCC, Skye Bank, Dudafa and the four companies, claiming that the frozen funds belonged to her.
In the suit filed before Justice Mohammed Idris through her lawyer, Mr. Ifedayo Adedipe (SAN), Patience is seeking an order directing the EFCC to lift the restriction on the four bank accounts.
She also wants damages in the sum of N200m against Skye Bank, for what she termed the violation of her fundamental right to own personal property.
The judge had on December 7, 2016 granted Patience the leave to amend her claims against the defendants in the suit.
At the resumed proceedings on Wednesday, Patience’s lawyer, Adedipe, told Justice Idris that he needed time to serve the amended court papers on the defendants.
He requested an adjournment, which was not opposed by the defence counsel.
Justice Idris consequently adjourned till February 13, 2017 for further proceedings in the case.