logo

Wednesday, 21 May 2014

Braithwaite expresses frustration over court’s adjournment of case



By Abdulwahab Abdulah
Lawyer and rights activist, Dr. Tunji Braithwaite has expressed disgust over adjournment of trial by an Ikeja High Court in a N10 billion   suit, he filed   against   Standard Chartered Bank over a building erected by the bank.
Braithwaite had dragged the bank to court accusing it of erecting a building in a residential area on Victoria Island, Lagos which he said constituted problems for residents in the area.
In the suit, Dr. Braithwaite is seeking an order declaring as illegal, the erecting of a 15-storey commercial building by the bank in an otherwise residential area.

More worrisome for Dr. Braithwaite is that the bank has installed giant industrial generators directly opposite his house.
At the resumed hearing of the case, the trial judge Justice Doris Okwujobi   had   adjourned till   June 27, to rule on an application filed by the bank seeking for striking out some paragraphs of the claimant's reply to the Bank's   amended statement of defence.
However,   Dr. Braithwaite, who according to him took some times   off the ongoing National Conference for the expected commencement of trial along with some experts witnesses complaint bitterly when trial on the matter could not hold, following the bank's application. Expressing his frustration over the delay in the four- year old suit, the octogenarian urged the court   to ensure that trial on the matter commenced early   by delivering her ruling timeously   on the "frivolous" application.
He said that the claimant had taken time to respond to the defence's application filed on Friday even when he had eight days to ensure that the trial was not truncated by the defence. He said further that   the defendant was capitalizing on the delay to continue to dissipate the res, (subject of the case)   as they are continuing building up to the 13th floor.
The defence counsel, Adeniyi Adegbonmire in his submission, refuted the claims that the defendant was   deliberately delaying   trial, saying that   he had already started cross examining the witness before the plaintiff   sought for the amendment of his statement of claims.
The lawyer who said the bank had the rights to build,   stated that the matter had delayed so far because the plaintiff decided to seek injunctive reliefs rather than pursuing the trial.
He said the motion on notice filed on May 8, was predicated on the fact that the plaintiff decided to introduce new facts that should have been   in its statement of claims in the reply to their amended statement of defence.‎