Justice A. S. Ibrahim of High Court in Lokoja, Kogi State, has awarded N1billion in damages against Sen. Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan, in a defamation suit filed against her by former Kogi governor, Yahaya Bello.
Yahaya Bello had dragged Akpoti-Udughan to court over the interview granted by the Senator to Arise TV.
The Defendantโs Counsel, Johnson J. Usman, SAN, had, challenged the jurisdiction of the court, saying that the suit was an abuse of court process as there were other cases filed against the senator at the courts in Abuja.
Belloโs Counsel, Friday Ekpa, however, countered that, saying that none of the cases before the FCT High Court was against the person of Alhaji Yahaya Bello.
After the High Court ruled that it had jurisdiction to entertain the case, Akpoti-Uduaghan appealed the ruling.
The Court of Appeal, in the appeal number, โCA/ABJ/CV/626/2024โ, however, dismissed the appeal for lacking in merit and affirmed that the Kogi State High Court had jurisdiction to entertain the case.
In the Certified True Copy of the judgment of the Kogi High Court dated April 23 seen on Friday in Lokoja, Justice Ibrahim held that based on the preponderance of evidence or balance of probabilities, judgment was entered in favour of the claimant.
The Judge held that upon the conclusion of the suit, the two issues formulated for determination were resolved in favour of the claimant.
โThe interview granted by the defendant on 4/11/2022 on Arise TV programme of โThe Morning Showโ is defamatory to the claimantโs character and reputation.
โThe said interview of 4/11/2022 in which the defendant described the claimant as a murderer, killer, perpetrator of evil acts, and a terror to the people of Kogi State was without justification.โ
The court also gave โan order of perpetual injunction against the Defendant, [his] agents, privies or associatesโ, restraining them from further issuance of the defamatory statements or words against the claimant on TV or radio stations.
โThe sum of one billion naira (N1,000,000,000) only (is) awarded as damages against the Defendant and in favour of the Claimant,โ the court said.




































Discussion about this post