Sports Law Tip

Sports Law Tip


Lionel Messi, Neymar and Cristiano Ronaldo are among the highest paid footballers in the world, their skills and contracts made this possible. 


As a professional footballer or manager, ensuring the contract represents the best interest and value of the talent is essential to a successful career. 


Here are a few terms a football contract should adequately provide for – 


1. Contract Period

.

2. Players Obligations

.

3.Compensation

.

4. Advertising Activities

.

5. Participation in other sports

.

6. Doping

.

7. Match Manipulation

.

8. Transfer to another club.

.

9.Right to termination

.

10. Sports regulations; and

.

11. Dispute Resolution 


If you have any questions on football contracts or other forms of contracts. Send a Mail 

#aoclegal #footballlaw #lawyer #nigerianlawyer #legalnaija #sportslaw #sportslawyer #football #soccer #messi #ronaldo #neymar

Carol Ajie’s Narcissistic Melodrama: Interrogating her Motive | Prince I. Nwafuru

Carol Ajie’s Narcissistic Melodrama: Interrogating her Motive | Prince I. Nwafuru

It was Frank D. Roosevelt who once said that “self-interest is the enemy of true affection.” Granted that in politics, the popular view is that interest is the only thing that is permanent and there is always an element of self-interest lurking beneath the surface of every supposedly altruistic action, however, such personal agenda should not be advanced to the detriment of others. Thus, whilst you cannot fault a person for pursuing his or her own interest, it has however, been recognized even amongst political scientists and philosophers that such psychological egoism should always give way to the greater good of the people and voters have been urged to suppress their self-interest in favour of general interest. And I add, such suppression of self-interest is even more appealing under a regime of a man whose policy thrust is “Putting You First.” 



After all, the best action is the one that produces the greatest well-being for the greatest number of people as rightly captured in Jeremy Bentham’s theory on the good of the greater majority, whose theory was later expandedby John Stuart Mill. Similarly, in finding a balance betweenJean-Jacques Rousseau’s theory of general will and John Locke’s postulation on group interestI would have thought that political participation (including but not limited to voting or supporting a candidate in elections) should not be aboutprotecting of self-interest alone but the interest of the majority of the citizens or the members of a group, who will benefit from the outcome of such election, in this case, the NBA members


This is not to say that the winner of a political contest should leave out his or her supporters in the cold. Far from it. The importance of political support group cannot be under-estimated even in the most advanced democracies. The supporters are still the ones to confer legitimacy on the ensuing administration. The supporters of a leader are the first to defend his or her policiesand equally push back the unwarranted attacks from the oppositions, akin to what obtains in conventional politics where political party members stick out their necks in defence of the policies of the ruling party. But does this mean that the interest of a supporter of a given NBA President should be elevated above the general interest of the Bar? Not at all. This should not be the case given that the ultimate goal of both the supportersand the eventual winner should be about aggregating the group interest and in our case, building a virile, transparent and all-inclusive NBA. I strongly believe that support for a candidate in a professional Association such as NBA should not be about“what is in it for me?” but “what is the good of the Bar?”

It is with the above philosophical premise that I commence my inquiry into the causative underpinnings behind the perennialtantrums and narcissistic conniptions from the camp of Carol Ajie (the self-styled Dame of the Bar) against the NBA PresidentTo be fair to her, before now, I had thought of CarolAjie as one who puts the interest of the Bar above her personal interest. Please, do not blame me for holding that initial impression. Perhaps I was misled by her ostentatious projection of herself as the great fighter, the amazon, promoter of women’s rights, and the defender of the defenseless. Alas, my impression of her later fizzled out when I decided to dig further into her person. She is indeed a great fighter as she is known to have fought almost all the previous NBA Presidents who refused to accommodate her over-bloated self-interest. To be sure, it is reported that Carol Ajie fought, Austin Alegeh SAN. She fought Okey Wali SAN. She equally fought Chief Wole Olanipekun SAN’s leadership. Carol Ajie also waged a consistent battle against OCJ Okocha SAN during the latter’s time as the NBA President. One common denominator in all her fights so far, is the need to promote her self-interest. 





As evident from the torrent of her posts on social media and from what is now clear to us, Carol Ajie’s grouse against the current NBA leadership is that she supported Mr Paul Usoro SAN to become the NBA President and her support is yet to be rewarded” with the commensurate juicy position. She had wanted to be nominated to the National Judicial Council – such a hallowed Institution – but her dream was dashed when the NBA President nominated her to the Board of National Human Right Commission (NHRC). I presume that the NBA Presidentwould have thought and rightly so, that nominating Carol Ajie to such a vital institution as NHRC is like putting the round peg in the round hole given her acclaimed stance on human right issues. I should also presume that being in the Board of NHRCwould have provided Carol Ajie a platform to advance her human right activismBut Carol Ajie would not accept the nomination to the Board of NHRC (because it wasn’t juicy enough) and this is notwithstanding her self-acclaimed exploits in propagation of gender rightsShe also claimed that she was promised a place in the Body of Benchers and the International Bar Association Council except that we do not know whether these alleged promises were made orally or in writing as no evidence of such promises has been shown to usOne thing is certain – Mr Usoro never promised Carol Ajie any appointment in exchange for her support. Of course, as it is now clear to us, Carol Ajie suo motunominated herself into the Council of International Bar Association even without the knowledge and consent of the NBA President. How do you explain such a desperation? In my view, such action amounts to a misconductgiven that the NBA President never authorized the said nomination. Ordinarily, one would be tempted to dismiss Carol’s song of sorrow on social media as antics and chants of adisgruntled self-serving supporter buconsidering the dimension such mudslinging has taken, it is imperative that we pause and ponder over the wider implication of such rants on the image of the Bar.  


It is also pertinent at this point that we interrogate her motives and expose her shenanigansBy way of caveat, I am not a serving or past executive member of NBA and do not have the authority of the Association to speak on its behalf. I equally do not hold brief for the current NBA President. My intervention is strictly based on the fact of my membership of the Association (which indeed gives me the locus to comment) and buoyed by my desire for issue-based and constructive criticism of any given NBA leadership including the present administrationMethinks, the cacophony of disgruntled and self-serving purveyors of self-interest-discordant-tunes under the guise of activism should not be allowed to drown the voice of constructive critics who genuinely want good leadership in the BarThe point I make is that if we allow the likes of Carol Ajie to pollute the NBA’s atmosphere with such acerbic and self-centered message of hate, we may in the process become deaf to or even mistake the voice of reason required to keep the Bar moving forward. And trust me, the tendency to accord Carol’s discordant voice with legitimacy always stares in the face which explains why we must all rise and call spade a spade. She must be reminded that she is an embodiment of self-contradictions and that her narratives cannot be believed. You cannot claim to have supported the NBA President due to his unparalleled competence, skills and sterling character and then turn around few weeks after the election to accuse the same man of being incompetent and unfit for the office. This is a classic case of a party approbating and reprobating. The law and lawyers have no respect for a witness who offers inconsistent evidence about an event and this is whom Carol Ajie has become. We must reject her inconsistent narratives.

Indeed, every man and woman of good conscience should be troubled by Carol’s conceited venture which is fueled by bitterness and egomaniacal motives but disguised as a message of liberation. Those who are discerning should be able to ask Carol Ajie these critical questions; Ma’am, would your positionabout the NBA President be different if he had nominated you to the NJC and Body of Benchers? Would you have turned against him if you were allowed to nominate yourself into the IBA Council? Why do you block any person whose comments on your social media platforms are not supportive of your narratives? – And you still go about denying that you delete and block people that reveal the truth in response to your lies on social media. Is it not true that you were recommended as the NBA representative on the board of NHRC because of your advertised human rights activism, but you rejected same on the basis that it may take some time before the Board of NHRC is inaugurated and that you may only accept to represent NBA at the NHRC as a bonus to your appointments at NJC and IBA? Why have you refused to disclose to the public that your additional reason for rejecting the NHRC nomination wasbecause they pay a paltry sum of N100,000.00 (One Hundred Thousand Naira only) for sitting allowance? Is it not true that you have prepared a Suit which you have refused to file even after sending a draft to the NBA President, only to use it as ablackmail tool and to force the NBA President to do your bidding? Whose interest are you projecting, as it is now clear that it is not that of NBA? Who are your faceless sponsors and backers? 

Incidentally the Assistant Publicity Secretary of the NBA, Akorede Habeeb, recently issued a statement describing Carol Ajie’s allegations against the NBA President as false andmotivated by self-interest. Despite this revelation, Carol Ajie has remained undeterred and has continued to spill more hogwash and falsehood on each passing day all aimed at blackmailing the NBA President to do her biddingThe most interesting thing in all this is that the NBA President that I know is not a man to be blackmailed into going against what he believes is in the interest of the Bar. He is made of sterner stuff and he is not the one to be distracted by Carol’s blackmailMr Usoro is too focused on delivering on his NBA reformation agenda and has totally ignored Carol Ajie’s rantings as they are of no consequence.Borrowing from Michelle Obama’s line, when Carol goes low, Mr President goes high. And we can see this in the recent achievements and transformation recorded within a short period of his assumption of office of NBA President. The transparency and accountability promised in Mr Usoro SAN’s manifesto is not a mere campaign rhetoric. It is gradually becoming evident and even the blind can see that it is no more business as usual.

Whilst I must acknowledge the right accorded to every citizen by the Constitution to express his or her views without restraint particularly on issues concerning the public, I must however, note that this right is not without some exceptions. For one, the right does not confer on the holder the license to publish false allegations against the person of another and in this case, against no less a person than the President of the largest professional association in Africa. Neither does the right permits the use of blackmail and subtle threat to actualize one’s selfish motive. Section 39 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended) which provides for the freedom of expression, aside from the intra-section exceptions provided therein also has derogations under Section 45 of the same Constitution. Thus, nothing in section 39 of the Constitution shall invalidate any law that is reasonably justifiable in a democratic society in the interest of public order or for the purpose of protecting the rights and freedom of other persons. This explains why laws such as the Cybercrime (Prohibition,Prevention, etc) Act, 2015 were enacted to checkmate the infringement of rights of others within the social media space.
Section 24(1) (b) of the Cybercrime Act provides that:
“A person who knowingly or intentionally sends a message or other matter by means of computer systems or network that-
(b)  he knows to be false, for the purpose of causing annoyance, inconvenience danger, obstruction, insult, injury, criminal intimidation, enmity, hatred, ill will or needless anxiety to another or causes such a message to be sent, commits an offence under this Act and is liable on conviction to a fine of not more than =N7,000,000.00 or imprisonment for a term of not more than 3 years or both.”

From the above provision, there is no doubt that the spread of false information or fake news using the social media, under whatever guise, is a crime in Nigeria. There are also civil remedies available to the victims of such injurious falsehood. The aim of this law is to instill circumspection and responsibility on the part of those disseminating information within the social media and it is never a defence that a purveyor of such false information disguises herself or himself as human right or gender activist. 

Whilst the NBA owes its members a duty to push back on Carol Ajie’s misinformation by coming out with rejoinders whennecessary, we as members also need to be more discerning given what is now clear to us as her motive behind her recent summersault and social media war. Beyond the afore-noted underlying criminality that is lurking around Carol Ajie’s social media false information and the disaffections such smear campaigns generate within the Bar community, there is also another bigger issue of misleading the public particularly members of the NBA on major policy issuesCarol Ajie has made several unsubstantiated allegations against the NBA President some of which cannot be dignified with a response. 


One of such allegations which I found quite bizarre is the part that accuses Mr Usoro of marginalizing the Igbos. Sadly, someundiscerning members of the Bar (whom we are equally not sure of their own motives) often fall for Carol Ajie’s false narratives, hook, line and sinker without taking steps to verify the credibility of same. One of the recent victims of such misinformation is the immediate past 2nd Vice President of the NBA, Mr Monday Onyekachi Ubani. In one of her posts on Facebook, on 17 November, 2018 Carol Ajie had amongst other falsehoods, barefacedly accused the NBA President of marginalizing the Igbos. Rather than take such information with a pinch of salt knowing the antecedents of the maker, Mr Ubani, in his comment, (in an apparent endorsement of Carol Ajie’smischievous post), was reported to have stated that: “Marginalizing the Igbos is a serious allegation. Mr President, Paul Usoro should examine his conscience, history is there to judge all. Thanks Carol for speaking truth out as always irrespective of whose ox is gored.” With all due respect, this is an infantile response and I am quite disappointed that this sort of response could come from a man of Ubani’s status. Did Mr Ubani care to cross-check the veracity of Carol Ajie’s baseless allegation of marginalization of Igbos? Has the NBA Presidentmarginalized the Igbos in his appointments or at all? As a matter of fact when all the list of all nominations made by the NBA President to all the statutory bodies is out, it will be obvious to all that regional representation was taken into consideration and a number of Igbo names are on the list. If Mr Usoro did not marginalize and has not marginalized the Igbos in his private practice, is it now that he will turn against them? During the 2015/2016 Election Petitions which yours truly was activelyinvolved in, from the Election Tribunals up to the Supreme Court, Mr Usoro in his magnanimity, invited two of his Igbo friends who are lawyers and who have their independent practices to join him in the Akwa Ibom Governorship Election Petition even though they were not in the defense team.

As someone who has worked closely with the NBA President, I also owe the public a duty to intervene on this particular issue of marginalization of Igbos. I have known Mr Usoro SAN since 2014 and I can tell you without fear of contradictions that he is one of the most detribalized Nigerians I have met. Mr Usoro is not interested in where you come from but your competence and ability to do the work. In Paul Usoro & Co where he is a Senior Partner, it is an equal opportunity Law Firm and as rightly captured by a commentator (whose view, I agree entirely with, being an insider in the Firm)you don’t have to bring a letter from a politician or a Judge to be employed in the Firm. You also don’t have to come from Akwa Ibom or Cross River to be employed and the number of non-Akwa Ibom lawyers in Paul Usoro & Co attests to this. Presently, in Paul Usoro & Co, there are more Igbo lawyers than Akwa Ibom Lawyers and even the Uyo branch of the Firm is headed by an Igbo lawyer. Taking it further, Paul Usoro is also not interested in your religious inclination. The Litigation Partner, Mr Munirudeen Liadi, who coordinates the Advocacy and Dispute Resolution practice Group of the Firm is a Yoruba man and a devout Muslim. The Firm is equally gender-balanced. I for one, got to Paul Usoro & Co without any recommendation from anybody. It was strictly my CV and the Firm’s open door policy that got me there. In some top law Firms in Nigeria, even with the best CV, you will still be required to bring a recommendation from one highly placed individual or politician. That is not Paul Usoro’s approach as he is willing to give you opportunity to prove your mettle provided you satisfy the minimum hiring requirement of the Firm. Thus, when the likes of Carol Ajie mouths about marginalization of Igbos and no least a person than Monday Ubani jumps at that falsehood, one is constrained to ask whether there is any mischievous agenda between the duoCarol Ajie should realize that her collaborators are exploiting her state of mind for their personal fights. And please be reminded that so far, there is no AkwaCross lawyer on the list of Usoro’s nominations to the NBA.

Within the NBA, Mr Usoro’s appointments so far have been balanced and Igbos have not been left out. It is a known fact that one of the earliest appointments made by the current NBA President was that of Professor Joy Ngozi Ezeilo who was appointed to represent NBA on the EU-Nigeria-UNODC-CTED Partnership Project III on Strengthening Criminal Justice Responses to Terrorism and Violent Extremism funded by the European Union. I therefore enjoin discerning members of the Bar to ignore Carol Ajie’s narcissistic melodrama and instead key into Paul Usoro’s vision for the Bar. 


I am confident that one Million Carol Ajie cannot stop an idea whose time has come. To be sure, Mr Usoro just like several other successful lawyers did not get to where he is on account of NBA appointments. In point of fact, his campaign promises were inter alia, anchored on professional self-development and upgrade of service delivery amongst lawyers so that Nigerian lawyers can be equipped to service the Nigerian economy, face the 21st century challengesand not to live off the NBA. Paul Usoro’s vision for a great and transparent NBA is on course and no amount of blackmail and self-serving campaign of calumny can derail it. Paul Usoro will always Put You First.


Prince is an associate at
Paul Usoro & Co. Since joining the firm, he has worked in various complex
matters with particular focus on Energy and Environment, Maritime, Banking,
Solid Minerals, Election Petitions, white-collar crime and Communications. 

Photo Credit 2 – www.guardian.ng



IVF: Matters Arising: A Critique Of Evans V. United Kingdom |Emaediong ofonime akpan

IVF: Matters Arising: A Critique Of Evans V. United Kingdom |Emaediong ofonime akpan

1.0     Introduction

Few technologies arrive
unannounced and few remain unchanged overtime. The development of techniques to
facilitate the fertilization of human eggs or ova is no exception. The medical
sector has not been let off the hook of the technological wave that has blown
across nearly all sectors of human lives. While IVF is now recognized as an
acceptable medical technique to combat the surging problems of infertility, it
is still being considered relatively novel. 
It is pertinent to not that the innovation of IVF has not met with the
same response like other medical intervention like; vaccines and the like.  


The new reproductive technologies constitute
a broad range of technologies aimed at facilitating, preventing, or otherwise
intervening in the process of reproduction. 
In this piece of legal opinion the focus is on the legal and ethical
issues associated with in-vitro fertilization in Nigeria. On 25th July 1978, Louise
Joy Brown was born in Great Britain, being the first successful birth through
the use of in-vitro-fertilisation. The IVF in its simplest form involves the
hormonal monitoring and stimulation of the woman producing ova, harvesting the
ova, mixing same with sperm in a petri dish containing a culture medium. It
involves a three day waiting period (approximately) for embryo development,
before the embryo is transferred back to the woman. IVF has come to challenge
traditional views and positions on abortion. This has been occasioned by the
right to destroy embryo with the consent of the couple. It the United Kingdom
the traditional stand against abortion has been threatened by the freedom of a
partner to withdraw from the procedure at any time and ordered the fertilised
eggs or preserved spermatozoa to be destroyed.

2.0     Statement of the Problem

          The filial relationship that results from an IVF procedure
is unprecedented and it comes with attendant problems which the legal framework
ought to cater for. Legal disputes may include the determination of who has
parental responsibility over a child begotten from IVF. The persons who have
the natural rights have become expanded from the usual two (mother and father)
to; the sperm donor, the egg donor, the surrogate womb mother, and the couple
who raises the child. IVF also raises questions of rights and liabilities as
they apply to the fetus, donors, and adoptive parents, as well as the role of
physicians and parenthood organisations, researchers, corporations, and government
in ensuring that the practice of IVF is not performed without adherence to
strict rules of ethical guidelines.

          According to Mccartan the role of the law in guiding
scientific development has not been clearly established, and in fact regulation
of scientific advancement has not been welcomed by those active in progressive
areas of medical research. She cites Burger, who opined that the law does
govern the advancements of medical science. 
This article is necessary to bring to the fore the challenges inherent
in the practice of IVF and innovative roles the law can play to cushion the
adverse effect of such challenges.

3.0     Legal/ Ethical Aspects of IVF

          Practical concerns raised by IVF which have ethical and
legal implications are disposal of surplus embryos created in vitro that prove
unnecessary or unsuitable for a couple’s reproductive requirements,
implantation of several embryos that results in high, multiple pregnancy, and
creation of the same result by natural conception following medically induced
super ovulation, and the option of so called ‘selective reduction’ to reduce
multiple pregnancy. Multiple pregnancy involves health care of mothers,
foetuses in utero, and newborn children, possibly born prematurely with low
birth weight and risk of associated complications.  

          Central legal issues in assisted reproduction are the
consent of both members of an infertile couple, consent of gamete or embryo
donor, and the legal status of a resulting child. A husband’s consent to his
wife’s insemination by donor is usually required, in order that any legal
presumption of his fatherhood be maintained. His objection would render the
child not his legal responsibility, and he may disclaim paternity if the wife
is serving as a surrogate mother to another man’s child. Sperm or ovum donors
must consent for lawful donation, but recovery of sperm from unconscious and
recently deceased men raises concerns such as how one can prove that his
consent was obtained in his unconscious state or before his death. Legal questions
that are also unresolved in many countries arise when donation of a couple’s
cyro-preserved embryo is possible, but only one member of the couple consents.

          One of the consequences of assisted conception is the issue
of parental responsibility of a child begotten of IVF. This is adequately
demonstrated in the American case of the Calverts. Crispina and Mark Calvert
were unable to conceive a child due to the fact that Crispina had had
hysterectomy. Her ovaries, however, were intact and capable to produce valid
ova. Therefore, they drew up a contract with Anna Johnson who agreed to be a
surrogate mother and later relinquish the child to the Calverts. Calverts
agreed to compensate Johnson $10,000 in three installments part paid before and
part after the birth of the child. After successful in vitro fertilization and
transfer of the embryo to Johnson’s womb, Anna required full payment of the sum
threatening that otherwise she would keep the baby. Three successive courts
decided in favour of Calverts. The basis of the decision was different in
different courts: two courts relied directly on genetic relatedness of the
Calverts to the child and invoked the assumptions of other possible ways of
determination of parenthood. The third and final court based its decision
purely on the concept of ‘intent’ of the parties, that is, what was the intent
of them when they entered the contract?

          The court case reveals two aspects of the impact of the new
reproductive technologies in defining kinship and gender. First, it
demonstrates that due to the new reproductive technologies, society is forced
to re-evaluate its assumptions about what is the basis of kinship and gender
relations. Second, they show that the ‘biogenetic’ basis, although perceived as
the basis, cannot be applied in the real situations. The procreative act,
marriage, donors of genetic material and the ones that engage in the nurturing
of the new creature (embryo and later the child) can all now be separated.
Prior to the new reproductive technologies, they all were supposed to be parts
of the same biologically grounded process. Since these roles can be delegated
now to different people, one cannot use the biological processes as the
determining factor to identify the kin persons. The intention of the court to
put more emphasis on the social seems to be logical since it still can identify
one person. While the biological facts have become confusing, the social ones
remain the same as before.`

          The above attests to the fact that the implications of IVF
spans beyond legal implications to, medical, societal and psychological
implications

4.0     Evans v. United Kingdom: A Critique

The
facts

          Natalie Evans and her partner, Howard Johnston, began
treatment for Assisted Conception at clinic In Bath July 2000. Sadly, preliminary
tests revealed that Evans had serious precancerous tumors in both her ovaries;
as soon as some eggs has been harvested for the purposes of IVF, her ovaries
were to be remove. It was during the same hour-long consultation in October
2000 that Evans and Johnston were informed both of the existence of the tumors
and of the policy regarding consent to IVF. Eleven eggs were harvested and six
embryo’s created and placed in storage, in November 2000, Evans underwent an
operation to remove her ovaries. The plan was for the implantation to take
place once Evan’s health permitted, following a recommended minimum period of
two years. The alternative and less certain procedure of freezing unfertilized
eggs was not available at that clinic at the time. Unfortunately, in May 2002
the relationship between Evans and Johnston broke down. In July, Johnston wrote
to the clinic withdrawing his consent to implantation

In viewing the decision of the court through the lens of a
contract, with Natalie Evans as the offeror and Howard Johnston being the
offeree, there remains the question of appropriate remedy where the contract is
breached by one of the parties in this case Howard Johnston. The question that
is pertinent to ask is; whether the acceptance communicated by the offeree to
the offeror contributed to her decision to have her ovaries removed. While it
may be argued that the removal of her ovaries were inevitable, the acceptance
to be a part of the IVF procedure by her partner led her to carrying out the
procedure knowing it was her only chance to bear children. Granted that the
Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 1990 provides that either partner may
withdraw his or her consent in writing at any time before implantation in the
woman’s uterus. However, a marriage of the provisions of the Article 16 of the
United Nations Declaration of Human Rights (1948) and Article 23 of the
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, would enable one to realize
that the right to marry, found a family and reproduce are inalienable rights.
It is not known to the writer at the time of writing this work whether there
exists a prototype of a pre-nuptial agreement for IVF procedures to protect
women like Natalie Evans. The object of the contract being the expected results
of the IVF procedure which would have seen that Natalie is not denied the right
to found a family.     

5.0     Conclusion/ Recommendations

          The court’s decision in Evans V. United Kingdom rests the
deciding swing of the pendulum in the decision to withdraw consent. IVF comes
with a plethora of implications for inheritance laws, family law and adoption
law to mention but a few. The question remains as to what the response of the
law is in the face of these teeming challenges. It is largely unclear whether
there exists a demarcating line between one partner’s right to found a family
and the other partner’s right to withdraw from an IVF procedure. The law will
need to re-evaluate the traditional underpinnings of the ban on abortion.
Future research may examine with a view to charting a new course on the
modalities to be put in place for timeous regulation of IVF in Nigeria.

REFFERENCES

1.     R B
Bernholz and G N Herman, ‘Legal Implications of Human In Vitro Fertilization
for the Practicing Physician in North Carolina’ (1984) 6(1)Campbell Law
Review,p.44.

2.     M K
McCartan, ‘A Survey of the Legal, Ethical, and Public Policy Considerations of
In Vitro Fertilization’ (2012)2(3) Notre Dame Journal of Law, Ethics &
Public Policy, p.696.

3.     W E
Burger, ‘Reflections on Law and Experimental Medicine’, (1968) 15 UCLA Law
Review, p. 436, 440

4.     R J Cook.,
B.M. Dickens and M.H. Fathalla Reproductive
Health and Human Rights
. (New York: Oxford University Press. (2003).

5.     The
case of R. V. Human Fertilization and Embryology Authority, exp. Blood (1997) 2
All ER 687 (Court of Appeal, England).

6.     K
Sedlenieks, Klavs, ‘New Reproductive Technologies: Towards Assisted Gender
Relations.’ (1999) An Essay for MPhil Degree, Department of Social Anthropology,
University of Cambridge.

Akpan, Emaediong Ofonime is currently undergoing
postgraduate studies at the University of Uyo and majors in Consumer
Protection. She can be reached at akpanemaediongofonime@gmail.com


Photo Credit – www.fitpregnancy.com 

NBA President, Paul Usoro SAN Reacts To The Kidnap Of A Member Of The Bar

NBA President, Paul Usoro SAN Reacts To The Kidnap Of A Member Of The Bar

Please find below the statement by the
Honourable President on the kidnap of Barrister Adeola Adebayo.

1. Our Ikole-Ekiti Branch Secretary, Adeola Adebayo,
was kidnapped on Saturday, 17 November 2018 at Erio, a small town in Ekiti
State and today, he spends his eighth day in captivity even though a ransom
amount was paid to his captorsfor his release last Thursday, 22 November
2018.  Adeola was driving from Osogbo with his wife and parents where they
attended a social event when he was stopped and kidnapped. 

2. One can only imagine the trauma that the
Adebayos – Adeola’s parents, wife and young children – are undergoing. 
Our hearts go out to them even as we ceaselessly pray for the immediate release
of Adeola from captivity.  Meanwhile, we must commend His Excellency, Dr.
Kayode Fayemi, the Ekiti State Government for his commitment to the immediate
release of Adeola.  We have been in touch with His Excellency as well as
with the Attorney-General and Commissioner for Justice of Ekiti State, Wale
Fapohunda and they give us confidence in this regard.  We can only urge
them not to relent in their efforts to secure the immediate release of Adeola.

3. As for the criminals who have kept Adeola
in captivity these eight days, we will not stop praying that God touches their
souls and consciences – or more correctly, the residue, if any, of their souls
and consciences–sufficient for them to release Adeola to us, more so as the
ransom amount has been paid.  We press on them to please conjure for a
moment the pitiable state of the Adebayos, the terrible distress and trauma
that they are all undergoing right now, particularly, Adeola’s wife, kids,
mother and father. If not for any other reason, we pray them, in the Name of
God, to have some consideration for Adeola’s innocent and very young children
and release their father to them forthwith.

4. This unfortunate incident again brings to
the fore the state of insecurity and frequency of violent crime in our
society.  Lawyers appear to be under siege.  Between September 2018
and now, we have experienced three reported incidents of violent crime – the
murder of our ObolloAfor Branch Chairman, Emeka Agundu, the kidnap of our Auchi
Branch Past Chairman, A AAtemoagbo and the attendant assassination of his wife,
Joan, and now, the kidnap of Adeola Adebayo.  These three incidents
illustrate the abysmal state of security in our land and the pervasive and
countrywide nature of these incidents.

5. Governments, through our law enforcement
and security agencies, needs to seriously crackdown on these criminals in our
midst.  It must not be said or even considered that our law enforcement
and security agencies are helpless in the face of these assault by a few
criminal elements.  We know that the national election season is upon us
and there is the tendency for Governments at all levels, in these periods, to
have a tunnel-view focus and deployment of resources primarily for their success
at the polls.  They must however resist that urge and remember that a safe
environment makes for peaceful, free and fair elections; they must also
remember that the primary reason for the election of governments into power is
to secure the lives and property of the Nigerian people and provide an enabling
environment for their socio-economic welfare.  They must therefore focus
on rounding up and bringing to book these criminals who make our lives so
unsafe and hellish.  

6. In particular, the intelligence gathering
capabilities of our security and law enforcement agencies must constantly be
enhanced; the agencies need to be well kitted and retooled, with superior
weapons and ammunition with which they can combat these hoodlums; there is,
furthermore, the urgent need for pervasive deployment of technology including
the installation of CCTVs in all the nooks and crannies of our country for
preventive crime detection.  These suggestions are not exhaustive neither
are they novel or out of the ordinary; we of the NBA as well as other
well-meaning persons and associations have proffered these and other
suggestions to Governments and their agencies on the issue of combating
crime.  Perhaps, what remains is the political will by our various
governments to do execute these suggestions and do something about the crime
virus that threatens our safety and lives. If there are challenges that are not
known to the rest of us, Government needs to be forthcoming and open in
discussing them with the citizenry and finding solutions thereto.  

7. The time to act is now before the
impression fully gains ground that a small band of bandits and hoodlums have
the capability to overrun the State and its security and law-enforcement
apparatus as it relates to the safety of our lives and property.  That is
an impression that this Government and indeed no government can ill afford.

Paul Usoro, SAN

NBA President

Event: BNLF Welcomes Young Lawyers In Lagos

Event: BNLF Welcomes Young Lawyers In Lagos


The British Nigeria Law Forum (BNLF) welcomes you to the Nigerian launch of its Junior Lawyers Division (JLD)

Wednesday, 5 December 2018 from 1:30 pm to 4.30pm

The Sun Heaven Hotel, Plot 8, Onikoyi Lane, Parkview Estate, Ikoyi, Lagos.

Join us for an afternoon of networking and light refreshments in the company of colleagues from the UK and Nigeria. Find out more about JLD and BNLF and future opportunities from the following speakers:

Opening Address by George Etomi, Founder & Principal Partner, George Etomi & Partners

Introduction to the British Nigeria Law Forum, activities in UK/Nigeria and how to join BNLF by Seye Aina, Chair, British Nigeria Law Forum 

Information about BNLF Junior Lawyers Division, engaging with junior and aspiring lawyers in the UK and Nigeria and how to get involved by Aji Ayorinde, Co-Head, BNLF Junior Lawyers Division

Cross Border collaboration by Boma Ayomide Alabi OON, Founding Partner, Primera Africa Legal

Information on how to get involved in the Law Society’s rule of Law and Human Rights programme by Lizzette Robleto de Howarth, International Programmes Manager, Law Society of England & Wales – opportunities 

This event is by invitation only and is kindly sponsored by George Etomi & Partners

RSVP  www.bnlf.org.uk

Right Of Adopted Child To Inheritance

Right Of Adopted Child To Inheritance



This court decision holds that an adopted child has equal rights to share in the property of the adopted parents. 

.

.

Learn & Share 


Case Law via @lawpavilion 

#inheritance #discrimination #childcare #adoption #law #legal #nigerianlawyer #nigerianblogger #nigerianblawg #legalnaija #lawpavilion

TIMI, the AI Companion For Every Young Lawyer

TIMI, the AI Companion For Every Young Lawyer



@LawPavilion is raising the bar with a new App to ease the work of young Lawyers, particularly new wigs. 

TIMI is Nigeria’s First Artificial Intelligence Legal Assistant designed to assist lawyers with legal research, legal opinions, litigation, and legal drafting. With TIMI, a new wig will have access to the  LawPavilion Electronic Law Reports, LPELR (online version); be able to chat with TIMI on Civil Procedure and litigation Rules and also get assistance on precedent Forms and Agreement Templates.

Imagine the possibilities if you could draft an originating process, a motion or any other court process, without getting stuck or confused, when you chat with TIMI; she can give you a step-by-step guide on how to go about filing or drafting those processes. Also, she provides notes with legal authorities, to support Civil procedure principles. This quick and easy access would definitely aid legal research and collation of relevant data to draft processes.

There is no other application that guides a young lawyer this way. Follow @lawpavilion and you may be the first person to meet Timi 🙂🚀.

Paul USoro; Keeping His Promises To The Bar

Paul USoro; Keeping His Promises To The Bar


I
believe that the NBA, at the national level, is in need of urgent and
far-reaching reforms if it must retain its relevance not only in the larger
society but even to its members.  These reforms will at the minimum,
achieve four significant and immediate goals, to wit;
(a) enhance efficiency in the operations of the
Association;

(b) engender confidence and trust amongst its
members (or, as some would say, win back the confidence and trust of members
who are disengaged);

(c) transform the NBA into a sustainable
institution; and

(d) increase the moral equity of the NBA to enable
it effectively influence required reforms in the justice subsector and remain a
respected watchdog of the society.

Paul
Usoro SAN

Reflections:
Institutional Reforms For The NBA (Part 1)

It is currently election season in Nigeria
and many politicians have begun sharing their plans for reviving the economy, developing
infrastructure  and promoting
opportunities for Nigerians to thrive. Many Nigerians usually take these
promises with a pinch of salt because often times, these politicians hardly
live up to their word. It is a cycle we have experienced over again.

Despite this lack of trust in politicians, it
is actually brightening to note that some people still keep their promises and
one of such esteemed leaders is Paul Usoro, SAN, current President of the Nigerian
Bar Association. Many lawyers will remember the promises given by Paul Usoro
SAN during his campaign and it is a breath of fresh air to actually see the
learned silk living up to his word. In the Honorable President’s Reflections published
here. He mentioned his plan to reform the NBA, and his actions are definitely
going in that direction as illustrated below.

(a)  Promise to enhance efficiency
in the operations of the Association
;

According to the NBA Publicity Secretary, the next NBA NEC meeting
coming up in December will be introducing the use of less paper as participants
have been advised to come with smart devices and will be forwarded all relevant
documents for the meetings prior to the event. Thus promoting environmental
protection, cost reduction and efficiency. This is a first of its kind
initiative within the NBA.

(b) Promise to engender confidence
and trust amongst its members  

Paul Usoro has introduced corporate governance and financial
accountability at the NBA by introducing the first ever publicly published
financial statement of the NBA.

(c)  
Promise to transform the NBA into a sustainable institution;

The NBA has appointed some of the best brains in the legal profession to
lead its work including; Iyabo Ogunseye, who was appointed to the Presidential
Panel on the reform of the Special Anti –Robbery Squad (SARS); Prof. Ngozi
Ezeilo, OON who was nominated to represent the NBA at the EU-Nigeria-UNODC –
CTED Partenrship III on strengthening criminal justice responses to terrorism
and violent extremism; and the nomination of Prof. Konyin Ajayi SAN as a
representative of the NBA in the council of the International Bar Association.

(d)   Promise to increase the moral equity of the NBA;

The NBA released the Report of the NBA Ad-Hoc Election
Working Group On The Rerun Gubernatorial Election held in Osun State and the
NBA’s report was fair and unbiased. The NBA raised an inquiry into the assassination
of Barrister Emeka Agundu, Chairman NBA, Obollo-Afor Branch. The NBA President
also entered talks with the Inspector – General of Police on issues bothering
on victimization of lawyers by the Police.

It has just been a few
months since the Learned Silk took up leadership of the NBA and obviously there
are still a number of far –reaching innovative strategies which Paul Usoro will
introduce to the Nigerian Bar Association. Certainly all these go with the
Honourable President’s mandate to #PuttingTheBarFirst. 

Legalnaija

False Advertisement and Vulnerable Persons in Nigeria (2) | Akpan, Emaediong Ofonime

False Advertisement and Vulnerable Persons in Nigeria (2) | Akpan, Emaediong Ofonime

Flawed and
insignificant research propagated in advertisements amount to misleading
advertisements. In the same vein, where an advertisement, is based on flawed
and insignificant research or are contradicted by prevailing authority or
research section 43(a) of the Lanham Act
refers to such advertisements as false. In Alpo
Pet Foods v. Ralston Purina Co.[ii]
the claimant brought a claim of false advertising against Purina whose
adverts that its dog food was beneficial for dogs with canine hips dysplasia
demonstrating that the claims was supported by test results conducted by Purina
which showed that the methods used to conduct the tests were inadequate and the
results could therefore not support Purina’s claims. 


The case involving Purina
is a common re-occurence in Nigeria specifically the Uyo Metropolis in Akwa
Ibom State. Adverts that make claims that have been rebutted by prevailing
scientific authority can be sighted within the city. (Discovery Park ” Eat a Plate of Isi-Ewu or Nkwobi daily its
is good for your health
) such adverts pose health risks for vulnerable
consumers especially the elderly. They lure consumers to make decisions
(purchase decisions) that are based on such claims that have been unseated by
superior evidence like the opinion of Ballentyne[iii] which
states that goat meat though healthy should not be consumed daily. Another
popular case of advertisements that makes flawed research claims are the likes
of Iguedo Goko cleanser, Dazzle Shea
butter.
These adverts claim to cure all kinds of ailments and make
diagnosis based external symptoms of a person example rashes, heat flushes,
painful urination etcetera which are not enough base medical diagnosis. The
adverse impacts of these advertisements have led consumers into going against
established medical precaution s and placing their confidence in these products
can eventually worsen their condition and send them to intensive care.

Trade marks
infringement also constitutes false advertisements as it is intended to mislead
and confuse consumers. In Edina Really
Inc. v. TheMLSOnline.com[iv]
the use of a key word in an advert amounted to trade mark infringement and
false advertisement as it was purported to mislead consumers. In Hamzik v. Zale Corps/Delware,[v]
the use of another’s trademark to trigger online advertisements (i.e to
generate traffic) was regarded as a clear cut case of false advertisement and
trademark infringement.[vi]
The case of Polariod Corp v Pzlora
Electronics Corp
laid the test for such confusion. False labelling on
products constitutes false and misleading advertisements; it may take various
subtle ways like images that are suggestive, false production origin, false
nutritional value. The Pre-Packaged food (Labelling) Regulations 1995 and
Regulation 18 of The Nigerian Food Products (Advertisement) Regulations[vii]
prohibits false labeling. The Food and Drugs Act 1955 makes it an offence to
give any food exposed for sale a label that falsely describes the food or is
calculated to mislead as to its nature, substance, or quality. Quality was been
defined in the case of Aness v. Grivell[viii]
to mean the commercial quantity and not the commercial description. Quality
also includes nutritional or dietary value of the food and any label construed
to mislead the public on such grounds are misleading advertisements. In Kingston-upon-Thames Royal London Borough
Council v. F.W Woolworth and Co. Ltd,[ix]
the test of false labeling or advertisement as depends on whether a label
or advertisement falsely described food seems to depend on how an ordinary
individual would interpret the description in question. The publishing, giving
or display of such product is a strict liability offence without the element of
mens rea needed to secure a
conviction as decided in Kat v Diment.[x]
The NAFDAC Guidelines for Advertisements of Regulated Products in Nigeria[xi]
recognises the prevalence of herbal medicine amongst Nigerians. In a bid to
protect the consumer from misleading adverts or labeling of herbal medicines
states that such labels and advert shall include the caveat, “These claims have
not been evaluated by NAFDAC.”[xii]
This is not enough protection especially where most adverts by herbal medicine
dealers are aired on public address systems in the local languages and since
the caveat by NAFDAC only requires that it be stated in English language by
implication, it is this lacuna that herbal medicine advertisers exploit and
deceive consumers. Furthermore the NAFDAC regulation does not foresee the
protection of animals even though that is beyond the scope of this work. The
Medicines Act[xiii]
the United Kingdom counterpart of the NAFDAC Regulation takes a more holistic
definition which includes substances or articles manufactured sold or supplied
to be administered to human beings or animals for a medicinal purpose. The
Medicines Act prohibits the issuance of false advertisements relating to
medicinal products. It also states that an advertisement is false or misleading
only if it falsely describes the medicinal properties of the medicinal product
to which it relates.

Advertisements on
weight loss product have also come under scrutiny for being false and
misleading. While some consumers do not live to tell the story, on a daily
basis vulnerable consumers are influenced by the idea of a perfect body sold by
the media to purchase quick weight loss products. In the Indian case of Smt Divya Wood v Ms Gurdeep Kaur Bhuhi,[xiv]
the court decided that a refund be made to a consumer who paid for a body care
programme that promised weight reduction. After payment and undergoing
treatment the plaintiff did not lose any weight. The apex consumer court said
“we entirely agree with this findings recorded by the fora below such
tempting advertisements, giving misleading statements with regard to the
alleged treatment, are increasing day-by-day and are required to be checked so
that persons may not be lured to pay large amounts in a hope that they can
reduce their weight by undergoing the so-called treatment.” In Jody Gorran v Atkins Nutritional Inc,[xv]  the plaintiff Jody Gorran lured by the advert
Atkins Nutritional Inc. proceeded to begin their diet as advertised. Rather
than lose weight Jody Gorran gained high cholesterol levels, angina and some
other heart complications that needed emergency surgery to save his life. He
sued Atkins the courts however did not rule in his favour stating that the
Atkin’s diet book did not constitute advertisements. It appears the decision of
the court was based on the fact that safe and effective methods of weight loss
often involve a modification of behaviour, decreased calorie intake and
exercises. This is not particularly appealing as a result some consumers opt
for weight loss products that promise rapid weight loss with little or no
effort.[xvi]
Despite efforts to curb false and misleading adverts, they have continued to
grow in weight-loss advertisements, this is problematic because some vulnerable
consumers base their decision making on advertising, and advertisements with
false and misleading information pose threats to them. Furthermore, if the
entire field of ‘weight-loss’ advertisement is subject to wide-spread
deception, advertising will lose its role in the efficient allocation of
resources in a free-market economy. This is because other manufacturers end up
advertising the impossible in order to compete and the deceptive promotion of
quick and easy weight-loss solutions could potentially fuel unrealistic
consumer expectations.

Making false promises
in order to sell a product is another unfair and misleading advertising tool.
Promotional advertisements in general encourage the consumption of these
products in large quantities in avid to win the lucky reward. In the case of Bonn Nutrients Pvt. Ltd v Jagpal Singh[xvii]
a consumer brought a complaint that in order to promote a brand of bread
called “Bonn” the manufacturers announced through advertisements that
each packet will contain a scratch and win coupon. The consumer-complainant claimed
he bought several quantities of the product but every time he scratched the
coupon it read “try again”. The court ruled in his favour and stated
that the advertisements misled the general public and it had not made good on
the statements it made in its advertisements. Cases like “Bonn” exists
howbeit; the regulatory agency saddled with the responsibility is the Nigerian
Lottery Commission. They appears to be only concerned with ensuring that the
lucky prize exists and nothing more. It can be said conclusively that these
regulatory agencies do not provide protection for the consumer who might be
harmed by his efforts to win the coveted prize, however, the efforts include
excessive consumption of the product.

END NOTES



[i] Akpan, Emaediong Ofonime is
currently undergoing postgraduate studies at the University of Uyo and majors
in Consumer Protection. She can be reached at akpanemaediongofonime@gmail.com.
[ii]    913 F.2d 958 (D.C. Cir. 1990)
[iii]   D Ballentyne, www.supplementsource.co.ca
accessed 9th January 2017.
[iv]    (2006) WL 737064. See also F.T.C v. Sili Neutralceutical 154
F.SUPP 2D 497.
And Playboy Enterprises               Inc.
v. Netscape Communication Corps
55 F. SUPP 2D 1070 (C.D CAL). 
[v]     NO3 : 06-CV-1300
[vi] The Trademark Act CAP T 13 LFN
2004 regulates the use of a trademark. Consequently, the use of a trademark
identical to that of COCACOLA by
AJE[vi] to sell an identical
product ‘Big Cola’ amounts to only an infringement of trade mark because the
existing framework’s definition of false advertisement does not bring into its
purview trademarks infringement. Consumers were under the impression that it was
coca cola. One trader noted that she was mislead to  purchase ‘Big Cola’ thinking it was Coca
cola, she lost customers who came to purchase coca cola because she sold ”Big Cola’ to consumer unknown to her
that it wasn’t Coca-Cola which the
customer requested.
[vii]   1994 NO.15. S.I 13 of 1996
[viii]  (1915) 3KB 685, at p.691.
[ix]    (1968) 1Q.B. 802.
[x]     (1951) 1 K.B. 34.
[xi] NAFDAC
is empowered by the NAFDAC Act CapN1 LFN 2004 to regulate and control the
manufacture,               exportation,
importation, and advertisement of medicines, cosmetic, medical devices, bottled
water and              chemicals. The
Advertisement Control Division in the directorate of Registration and
Regulatory Affairs of        NAFDAC.
[xii]
Regulation 10
[xiii] 1968
[xiv] (1989) L.P.A No. 646
[xv]   No. 2004-CC-006591-MB(Fla. Palm Beach County
Ct.May 26,2004)
[xvi] J
Cawley et all, ‘The Effect of Advertising on Consumption: The Case of Over-the
Counter Wight Loss Products’ (2011)
University of Cornell Law Review
[xvii] IV (2005) CPJ 108 NC.
Akpan, Emaediong Ofonime is
currently undergoing postgraduate studies at the University of Uyo and majors
in Consumer Protection. She can be reached at akpanemaediongofonime@gmail.com

Photo Credit – Here