Business Regulations, Law & Practice | |
Business Regulations, Law & Practice | |
1209 VIEWS | |
![]() |
Thursday, May
14, 2020 / 9:12 PM / by NIPC / Header Image Credit: Daily Nigerian
On the 13th of May 2020, the Federal High Court
sitting in Abuja Judicial Division struck out the Suit filed by Hon. Ali Sani,
a member of the Governing Council of Nigerian Investment Promotion Commission
(NIPC) on the grounds that the Plaintiff lacked locus/ legal right to bring the
Suit and that the Suit was statute barred.
Hon. Sani instituted the action on the 25th of
November 2019 seeking to restrain NIPC, the Chairman of NIPC and the Executive
Secretary of NIPC from appropriating and spending funds realised as internally
generated revenue (IGR). He also filed an ex parte application and
interlocutory application for an injunction to restrain the Commission from
further spending its IGR for 2018, 2019 and 2020.
On the 17th of December 2019, Honourable Justice A. I.
Chikere of the Federal High Court had granted an interim order restraining NIPC
from appropriating and spending its IGR pending the hearing and determination
of the motion on notice for injunction. Following the grant of the interim
order, NIPC was unable to fund most of its activities and meet a large
percentage of its 3rd party contractual obligations.
Counsel to the Defendants, Messrs Afe Babalola &
Co, through the lead counsel Kehinde Ogunwumiju, SAN filed a preliminary
objection to the Suit and a counter-affidavit against the motion for
interlocutory injunction arguing that the Plaintiff had no legal right to file
the Suit as he was part of the Governing Council which approved the expenditure
of the IGR. The Defendants Counsel also argued that the Plaintiff cannot ask
the Court to restrain NIPC from exercising its statutory powers to spend funds
duly approved for spending in accordance with extant laws. The Counsel asked
the Court to strike out the Suit on the ground that it was statute barred and
that the Plaintiff lacks the locus to file the suit.
In its ruling on the motion for injunction, the
Federal High Court held that the Plaintiff had no legal right to file the Suit
as the Court cannot grant a relief to restrain an executive body from
exercising its statutory powers. The Court held further that in any case, the
application was seeking to restrain the spending of an IGR that had already
been duly spent in 2018 and 2019.
Whilst ruling on the preliminary objection filed by
the Defendants, the Court struck out the name of the Chairman of NIPC, which is
non-existent on the ground that the said name is a non-juristic person in law.
The Court then struck out the substantive Suit on the
ground that it was statute barred having been filed more than a year after the
accrual of the cause of action in line with the provisions of Section 2 (a) of
the Public Officers Protection Act and as such, the Court lacked jurisdiction
to entertain the Suit.
Related to NIPC
Related Video
Related News - Business Regulations, Law
& Practice