Senior Advocate of Nigeria(SAN)
No. 20, Etang O. Obuli Crescent, Jabi, Abuja
SUMMARY
Age: – 55 years
Gender: – Male
Profession: – Legal Practice
Experience: – 28 years of uninterrupted full time legal practice as Solicitor and attorney at trial and appellate courts in Nigeria.
Special Areas of interest: – Constitutional and Electoral Law litigation, Corporate and Commercial Law practice, Labour Law disputes, defence attorney in criminal law matters.
Professional Excellence: – Conferred with the rank of Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN) in August, 2011, in recognition of outstanding professional competence, loyalty, ability and integrity as advocate; and for significant contribution to the development of the legal profession in Nigeria.
Page | 1
PERSONAL DETAILS:-
Date of Birth: – 20th May, 1963
Place of Birth: – Enugu, Nigeria
Nationality: – Nigerian
State of Origin: – Cross River
Local Government Area: – Biase
Marital Status: – Married
Mobile Numbers: – +234-8035883474; +234-8058116191
Email Address: – [email protected]
EDUCATION AND QUALIFICATIONS
S/N Institution Qualification Year 1. Nigerian Law School, BL-Barrister-at– Law. December, Lagos. 1990 2. University of Cross River L.L.B(Hons) September, State (now University of 1989 Uyo) 3. School of Arts and WAEC (A/Level) June, 1984 Science, Uyo 4. Secondary School, Adim WAEC (O/Level) June, 1982 5. Primary School, Adim FSLC July, 1976
CAREER PROGRESSION
1. As Litigation Officer (NYSC) Nnewi Local Government Area – Oct, 1990 – Sept, 1991 Headquarters, Nnewi Anambra State.
2. As Barrister and Solicitor Chief Richard Efa & Co – Dec, 1991 – Dec, 1992 53, Edgerly Road Calabar.
3. Barrister and Solicitor Kanu G. Agabi(CON), SAN & Associates – Jan, 1993 – June, 1995 No. 1, Edet Eyo Crescent Calabar.
Page | 2
4. As Managing Partner Minimah, Efut & Associates – July, 1995 – March, 1997 2nd Floor, Desam House, No. 38 Ndidem Usang Iso Road, Calabar
5. As Managing Partner Kanu Agabi & Associates – April, 1997 – Aug, 2007 No. 1, Edet Eyo Crescent Calabar
6. As Head of Chambers and Chairman, Management Committee Kanu G. Agabi (CON), SAN & Associates – Sept, 2007 – July, 2011 Trinity House, Mabushi Abuja.
7. Founder and Principal Partner Okon N. Efut& Associates – Aug, 2011–date Trinity House, Mabushi, Abuja.
POSITIONS OF RESPONSIBILITY
1. Library Prefect, Secondary School, Adim – Sept, 1978 – Sept, 1981
2. External Legal Adviser (Consultant), Calabar Free Trade Zone – Nov, 1999 – July, 2007 Nigeria Export Processing Zones Authority, Calabar
3. Company Secretary, Presbypress Ltd – Aug, 2001 – Sept, 2010 Diamond Hill, Calabar
4. Director, Lawyers Microfinance Bank Ltd – March, 2015 – August, 2017 Trinity House, Mabushi, Abuja.
5. External Solicitor, Code of Conduct Tribunal (The Presidency) – Plot 89, Sector B, Cadastral Zone B16, Daki Biyu, Jabi Abuja. Page | 3
MEMBERSHIP OF ASSOCIATIONS/BOARDS
1. Member, Nigerian Bar Association – Dec, 1990 - date
2. Chairman, Adim Community, Calabar – 1999 – 2005
3. Member, Cross River State Standing – Jan, 2000 – Jan, 2008 Peace Committee on Adim – Ugep Land Disputes
4. Member, Governing Board of Duke Town – 2006 – 2009 Secondary School, Calabar
5. Member, Disciplinary Committee of the Nigerian – Jan, 2007 – Aug, 2007 Bar Association, Calabar Branch
6. Legal Adviser & Exco. Member, Biase presbytery of Presbyterian – 2000 – 2002 Church of Nigeria
7. Legal Adviser & Exco. Member, Calabar Synod of Presbyterian – 2004 – 2010 Church of Nigeria,
8. Member, Forum of General Assembly – 2004 – 2010 Legal Advisers of Presbyterian Church of Nigeria
9. Secretary, Men’s Christian Association (MCA), PCN – 2001 – 2003 Efut Ekondo Parish, Calabar
10. Legal Adviser, Independent Baptist Church of Nigeria – 2005 – 2009
11. Vice President, Men’s Christian Association First Abuja Parish, PCN, Garki 11, Abuja. –
Page | 4
PUBLICATIONS:
1. “Judicial Precedents in Nigeria” – being a Thesis submitted for the award of L.L.B (Hons).
2. “Understanding the Fundamentals of Fundamental Human Rights” being an Article published in Essays in Honour of Hon. Justice Olabode Rhodes-Vivour, JSC.
3. “Contending with the Legality of Legal Technicalities” being an article in Judicial, Leadership and Governance. Essays in honour of Hon. Justice Okoi Itam.
CONTRIBUTION TO DEVELOPMENT OF THE LAW IN NIGERIA:-
A. NOTABLE CASES CONDUCTED AT THE SUPREME COURT
1. LABOUR PARTY Vs. INEC (2009) 6 NWLR (Pt. 1137) Page 315 at 337 Led the legal team for the Respondent (INEC), wherein we submitted, and the Supreme Court in its leading judgement by Ogbuagu, JSC agreed with our submission, and made the following notable pronouncement:- “In summary, as rightly submitted by the respondent, once an election is declared null and void, the law regards whatever was purportedly done in the name or guise of an election, as not having taken place at all. In the eyes of the law, the election is void ab initio, and a fresh election is conducted as if the earlier one did not take place at all.”
2. ODUMEGWU OJUKWU Vs. UMARU MUSA YAR’ADUA & 4 OTHERS (2009)12 NWLR (Pt.1154) Page 50 at 113 and 127 Led the team of lawyers for the 3rd Respondent (INEC) wherein we submitted, and the Supreme Court Per Niki Tobi JSC in agreeing with our submission, held as follows:- “A petitioner who challenges the election of a respondent on the ground of non-compliance with the provisions of the Electoral Act must plead not just the fact of the alleged non-compliance, but must go a step further to plead that the non-compliance substantially affected the result of the election.”
Page | 5
“Counsel has the right to introduce innovations in procedure of courts where the rules are silent on a particular procedure to be adopted. Where the rules specifically provide for a procedure, innovations of counsel outside the specific rules will go to no avail. They rather destroy the case of the party. This is because the courts expect the counsel to follow the procedure provided for in the rules.”
3. BARR (MRS) AMANDA PAM Vs. MOHAMMED AND ANOTHER (2008) 5 – 6 S.C (Pt.1) Page 83 at 106 Appeared for the 2nd Respondent (INEC) wherein the appellant’s appeal based partly on the denial of fa ir hearing, was dismissed, and the Supreme Court per Oguntade , JSC, held as follows:- “The question of fair hearing is not just an issue of dogma. Whether or not a party has been denied of his right to fair hearing is to be judged by the nature and circumstances surrounding a particular case.”
4. MUHAMMADU BUHARI Vs. INEC and 4 OTHERS (2008)12 S.C.(Pt.1) Page 1 at 172 Was in the team of lawyers for the 1st Respondent (INEC) who reviewed the facts, researched and appeared for INEC in the appeal, wherein the Supreme Court, Per Niki Tobi, JSC. upheld the election of Umaru Musa Yar’adua; and held as follows: “Nigeria is one vast and huge country made up of so many diversities in terms of tribes, cultures, sociology, anthropology and above all, quite a number of political parties, (some large, some small). These diversities coupled with the usual aggressiveness of Nigerians arising particularly from the do or die behaviour in politics; there must be irregularities. Courts of law must therefore take the irregularities for granted unless they are of such compelling proportion or magnitude as to affect substantially the result of the election.”
Page | 6
5. OKEREKE Vs. YAR’ADUA (2008) 4 – 5 S.C (Pt.1) Page 206 at 229. Was in the team of lawyers who represented the 3rd – 35th Respondents, wherein the election of Umaru Musa Yar’adua could not be successfully challenged. Upholding our submission, the Supreme Court, Per Muhammad JSC held that:- “Pre-trial sessions in the present dispensation are a condition precedent before a tribunal or court can proceed to entertain any election petition or matters relating thereto.”
6. ATIKU ABUBAKAR Vs. UMARU MUSA YAR’ADUA AND OTHERS. Appeal No. SC. 72/2008: judgement delivered on 23rd October, 2008 Was in the team of lawyers who represented INEC, wherein the Supreme Court held that the Appellant (Atiku Abubakar) who did not contest the Presidential election could not legally and logically complain that the election was marred by rigging, corrupt practices or non-compliance with provisions of the Electoral Act.
B. NOTABLE CASES CONDUCTED AT THE COURT OF APPEAL
1. STEEL BELL (NIG.) LTD Vs. GOVERNMENT OF CROSS RIVER STATE (1996)3 NWLR (Pt. 438) Page 571 at 588 The government of Cross River State in its White Paper made far- reaching decisions affecting the appellant company without giving it any opportunity to defend itself. I represented the Appellant. In the leading judgement by Niki Tobi JCA (as he then was); the Court of Appeal agreed with my submission, and enlarged the scope of applicability of an Order of certiorari as follows:- “Wherever the powers vested in the body or person are such that the exercise of that power may adversely affect the interests of citizens, there clearly exists a duty on the body or person to act fairly, otherwise certiorari will lie to quash the decision.”
Page | 7
2. PROGRESSIVE PEOPLES ALLIANCE (PPA) Vs. INEC (2010)12 NWLR (Pt.1207) Page 70 at 98 Led the legal team for the 1st Respondent, wherein we submitted and the Court of Appeal Per Abba Aji, JCA agreed with our submission and held that:- “A candidate at election is an individual who was validly nominated by its Party. The mere proposal of the name of a Party by a political party without more, does not amount to a valid nomination and no lawful exclusion can take place without a valid nomination.” The Court of Appeal also held that a person who did not participate in an annulled election cannot legally participate in the re-run election.
3. LABOUR PARTY Vs. INEC (2008)13 NWLR (Pt. 1103) Page 73 at 102 Was in the team of lawyers who represented the Respondent (INEC), wherein the Court of Appeal in its leading judgement by Inyang Okoro, JCA (as he then was) agreed with our submission and made the following pronouncement:-
“Where a general election has been held and there is a false start, for example, a candidate who ought to have been part of the election was unlawfully excluded or there is no level playing ground for all the candidates and that election is subsequently either cancelled by the regulating authority like INEC or nullified by an order of a court or tribunal, and a re- run or re-start is ordered, it is my humble view that the re-run or re-start refers to that general election cancelled or nullified, and not the bye-election.”
4. UNIVERSITY OF CALABAR Vs. IGNATIUS P. UMOH: judgement delivered on 4th March, 2010. Appeal NO. CA/C/87/2008) Appeared for the Appellant (UNICAL); wherein the Court of Appeal, Per Ngwuta JCA(as he then was) agreed with my submission that though an issue of law or jurisdiction can be raised by the court suo motu, the parties must be given opportunity to address on it so as not to violate the rule of fair hearing.
Page | 8
5. CENTRAL BANK OF NIGERIA AND 3 OTHERS Vs. ADALMA TANKERS AND BUNKERING SERVICES LTD. Appeal No. CA/C/23/2000, delivered on 19th May, 2009. Appeared for the 2nd Appellant Nigerian Deposit Insurance Corporation (NDIC); wherein the Court of Appeal Per Jafaaru Mika’ilu, JCA held that the Parties in an instant case need not be exactly the same as in the previous case for estoppel or res-judicata to apply, as long as the subject matter of the litigation is the same in the previous and subsequent cases.
C. REMARKABLE CONTRIBUTION TO THE COURSE OF JUSTICE
1. RESTORATION OF FAMILY PROPERTY LEASED FOR EVANGELICAL PURPOSES BUT CONVERTED TO PERSONAL USE BY A BISHOP
,,,,< In the High Court case of Chief Duncan Edem Archibong Vs. Isonguyo J. Isonguyo (Suit No. HC/410/2004), the family of Chief Achibong Eyo Etim in 1920 gave its land at No.1, Atimbo Road, Calabar to Mount Zion Light House Full Gospel Church for evangelical purposes, but its Bishop unlawfully converted part of the land to personal use. In its judgement on 29th January, 2007, the Cross River State High Court presided over by Honourable Justice Eyo Ita upheld our claim and restored ownership of the land with all three (3) buildings thereon to the family.
2. FEDERAL GOVERNMENT OF NIGERIA SAVED N1BILLION.
In the Federal High Court case of Citec International Estates Limited vs. Government of the Federal Republic of Nigeria and 5 others (Suit No. FHC/ABJ/M/519/2007); Citec International Estates Limited sought to quash a decision of the Federal Executive Council and claimed N1billion for unlawful interference with its proprietary right against the Government of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. I represented the Government of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, the Attorney General of the Federation and the Secretary to the Government (SGF) in the suit.
I successfully defended and protected the interest of the Federal Government, and the suit was accordingly dismissed, in favour of government on 23rd March, 2011.
3. CHECKING ARBITRARY EXERCISE OF EXECUTIVE POWER BY THE GOVERNMENT OF CROSS RIVER STATE GOVERNMENT In the Federal High Court case of Captain Emmanuel Ihenacho and Another Vs. Attorney General of Cross River State and Another (Suit No: FHC/CA/M38/2014); I represented the applicants; Captain Emmanuel Ihenacho and Integrated Oil and
Page | 9
Gas Limited who sued the Government of Cross River State over arbitrary closure and forceful takeover of the applicants’ landed property. The case was successful and the court ordered the immediate re-opening of the closed premises. Thus the arbitrary exercise of executive power to impose excessive charges on businesses operating in the State and sealing their premises for failure to obey was checked. Judgement was accordingly delivered in favour of Applicants’ on the 18th day of June, 2014 by Honourable Justice A. Obile; and the sum of N200,000,000.00 (Two Hundred Million Naira) was awarded against the Cross River State Government.
4. UNLAWFUL RETIREMENT NULLIFIED
In the National Industrial Court case of Mr Musa Kanwai Vs. Federal Housing Authority and Another. (Suit No. NICN/ABJ/24/2013) I represented the claimant, and successfully challenged the compulsory retirement of the claimant who was unlawfully retired from service before his statutory retirement age. The National Industrial Court upheld our claim and declared the retirement null and void, and ordered the defendant to pay the claimant all his entitlements. Judgement was delivered on 14th October, 2016 by Honourable Justice E.D.E. Isele.
5. WITHHELD SALARY AND ENTITLEMENT ORDERED TO BE PAID
In the National Industrial Court case of Mr Brendan Ndifon Kachimi Vs. The Registered Trustees of Institute of Human Virology Nigeria (IHVN) (Suit No. NICN/ABJ/25/2015) instituted against the Institute of Human Virology of Nigeria, I successfully claimed the salary and entitlements of the claimant whose salary and entitlements were unlawfully withheld, thereby checking the oppressive tendencies of a powerful employer. Judgement was delivered on 16th February, 2017, and the employer was ordered to pay the withheld salary and entitlements to the claimant.
HOBBIES: Reading, Listening to Music, Jogging and Tennis.
Page | 10