Chief Oluwole Oladapo Olanipekun, SAN was born on 18^th
November, 1951 at Ikere-Ekiti. He attended Amoye
Grammar School, Ikere-Ekiti, Ilesa
Grammar School, Ilesa, the University
of Lagos and the Nigerian
Law School, Lagos.

Chief Wole Olanipekun SAN, is the founder and principal partner of
Wole Olanipekun & Co. He was conferred with the prestigious rank of a
Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN) in 1991 in recognition of his invaluable
contributions to the advancement of the Legal Profession in Nigeria, about 15 years after he was called
to bar. Arguably one of Nigeria’s leading barristers he has been involved as
counsel and amicus curiae in many of Nigeria’s landmark cases. He is also in
top demand internationally as an expert in Nigerian law.

Chief Olanipekun has presented over 100 papers on diverse topics on
Law, including; Economics, Politics, Literature and Corporate Governance in and
out of the country and within and without several universities. His practice areas include
constitutional law, pre and post election dispute resolution, arbitration and
alternative dispute resolution, labour law, commercial litigation, criminal law
and general practice.

He is
presently the Pro-Chancellor and chairman of the Governing Council of Nigeria’s
Premier University, the University of Ibadan. He was President of the Nigerian
Bar Association (NBA) between 2002 and 2004. Where He
displayed quintessential characteristics and took the Association to an
enviable height. He exuded brilliancy, diligence, enthusiasm, industry,
probity, conscientiousness and unparalleled patriotism to the Nigeria Bar
Association (NBA). Under him, NBA identified and stood for justice, rule of
law, constitutionalism and with courage, opposed all forms of oppression,
repression, brutality, ruthlessness and injustice.

He has at
different times served as a member of the National Judicial council (NJC),
Legal Practitioners Privileges Committee (LPPC), Council of Legal Education,
Legal Practitioners Disciplinary Committee and General Council of the Bar among
others. A Fellow of the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators, he was also
conferred with the national honour of the Officer of the Federal Republic (OFR)
in 2012.

He is happily married to Princess Omolara Olanipekun and the marriage is
blessed with two boys and two girls, three of whom are Lawyers.

Are you doing all you can to make sure your law firm is irresistible to potential clients? Because when it comes to legal consumers, it seems that love at first sight really does exist.

FindLaw’s 2014 U.S. Consumer Legal Needs Surveyasked respondents how many attorneys they contacted or seriously considered before making a selection, and the answer was astonishing: 72% replied, “one.” Either legal consumers are extremely open to positive first impressions, or they’re doing an excellent job of finding legal representation that matches their needs. (To be honest, it’s probably a bit of both.)

It begs the question: What are you doing to ensure that you are “The One” consumers are looking for? In a romantic context, advice for finding a good match would go something like: put yourself out there, be yourself and focus on the other person. Obviously, dating and legal marketing aren’t exactly analogous, but there’s something to be said about those tips:

Remember that none of these tips are about beating the system. Good attorney/client relationships aren’t built on manipulation. And legal marketing isn’t about playing the field. It’s about finding the right match. After all, a client who views your firm as “The One” can have a positive impact on your business for years to come.

Think about that number again: Nearly three out of four legal consumers select the first attorney they contact. Clearly online tools and old-fashioned word-of-mouth referrals can have a huge influence over your potential clients. Make sure you’re using them to your advantage. By focusing on meeting the right clients and presenting your best self online and in-person, you’ll up your odds of becoming “The One.”

Source – http://www.lawyermarketing.com

This week I was in a roomful of lawyers when we were asked when was the last time we’d got lost in the moment.  When were we so absorbed in a task that we didn’t notice anything or anyone around us? Answers were fascinated and varied – playing football, sketching, building Lego and even contract drafting.  (By the way the occasion was not just a spontaneous group overshare but the LOD-hosted Life With Law, the latest in a series of talks on how to live a more fulfilling life whilst practising law. This time the topic was mindfulness and flow.) 

“Flow”, the speaker and flow expert Dr. Kate Hefferon advised, is the formal expression of what we might describe as being in “the zone”.  We all seem to love being in the zone, when we are at our most focussed and at the top of our game.  We like its aftermath too, when we feel fulfilled and happy  The key to flow seems to be (sorry Kate for the layperson interpretation) balancing skill and challenge so that we are at once absorbed and stretched by a task at hand.  

We’re apparently more likely to be “in flow” when we are doing sports or physical activity, studying, being creative and, yes, working too.  The key steps for fostering flow at work, Kate explained, were providing autonomy, clear goals and feedback, as well as creating elements of challenge and using a variety of skills.  

This got me thinking about how we lawyers can get more flow in our lives.  After all we spend so much of our lives working we owe it to ourselves to squeeze every last drop of personal fulfilment out of our working day. lawySo, here goes:

1) Focus on one activity at a time: forget about multi-tasking, it’s a myth.  “Continuous partial attention” (as multi-tasking has been described more accurately) is not aspirational. Allow yourself to be drawn into a particular task or project and immerse yourself completely without distraction (whilst writing this I’ve closed my inbox and it feels good).

2) Create challenge every day: one of the lawyers present at Life With Law spoke about how he set himself stretch goals and interesting work-arounds to help him get satisfaction from even the most mundane drafting.  I sometimes set an imaginary word count on written documents to help me focus.  The end result is more succinct and powerful and I’ve enjoyed the challenge of saying more with less.

3) Increase your autonomy (and that of your team): autonomy is frequently cited as a key factor in work satisfaction and it seems that it’s also integral to operating at your peak.  Where you can, take ownership of how, when and where you work, and give the same privilege to others.

4) Set yourself clear goals: whether that’s what you want to achieve in the next 10 minutes, the next day or the next week.   Don’t just look at what you think has to be done, think about what you want to do and how you want to get it done.  I try to spend half an hour on a Monday morning mapping my week and always feel better for it.

5) Tap into a range of your skills: just because you are a lawyer doesn’t mean you have to stay chained to your Word documents.  If you enjoy drawing, problem solve with a blank page and a marker pen instead of your keyboard.   If you love running, think through a tricky issue when you are pounding the streets.

Hopefully by making these small “flow hacks” (as Buzzfeed might put it) we can be better lawyers too.

Simon Harper is Co-Founder of Lawyers On Demand, the UK’s original alternative legal service. For more information about Lawyers On Demand visit www.lod.co.uk.

Source:- globallegalpost.com 

Man hates (despises) the truth because it exposes him for what he is and it troubles what still remains of his conscience.”-Paul Washer.

Abiding by elements in the perceptual manifold, our country is in a bad-news default mode. In giving systematic judgements to daily events, each breaking of the sun brings us with yet another ‘new’ problem and issue to deal with, which sadly, we can’t seem to confront, thus, compounding our woes.
The grave situation of the Nigerian polity and the graver and darker consequential character awaiting its socio-political shorelines forecast by many regarding its guaranteed existence as an indivisible entity continue to hedge closer towards fruition. Political transactions, as of late have all contributed in no small account to the veritable stance that the country is more than fast sloping down the hill of crisis and meltdown. Yet, time after time, we have found it hard to boldly face and tackle our problems, not because we couldn’t do such or lacked the requisite will to do it, but because we are always afraid of rising up and facing our problems with the intent to at least frontally confront or fight them. Needless to say, corruption has found its strongest potency to deeply thrive in the Nigerian atmosphere. It is no longer news that politics and the rule of law are dead in Nigeria. In their place we now have blatant money laundering, large-scale looting, outright stealing and outrageous illegality. The befetting requisite appendage of the country would therefore be ‘The World Capital of Lawlessness’. Due process is now an alien and scare commodity in the country. At every yearly rating by Transparency International (TI), Nigeria finds herself ‘proudly’ jostling top positions with other corrupt countries in the world. Successive Governments of the day would boast of how far good and well they’ve been able to fight corruption, but the evident truth remains that their efforts can be compared to trying to stay clean in a muddy pool while engaged in fierce fighting with your staunch enemy. Enough being said about the grave situation of the Nigerian polity. But it certainly needs no saying, verification or validity that Nigeria is corrupt, and most Nigerians are corrupt. This clearly cannot amount to defamation.

The tort of defamation arises where an individual’s reputation or image is being tarnished by another. That is to say, where one person through the instrumentality of words uttered or words written reduces or ridicules the worth of another before right-thinking members of society, such person has committed the tortious  act known as defamation, and consequently has incurred some tortious liability on himself. The redress by law given to a defamed individual is awarding monetary damages to such defamed individual from the pockets of the defaulting party, in so much as such damages seek to restore the defamed party to his former high-ranking position and standing in society. However, surrounding factors come into play when accessing the claim that an individual has been defamed by another. That said, who then can be defamed? Of course, every member of the society can be defamed. For everybody has a right to protect his good name, whenever he feels his name is being dragged into the mud.

Thus, applying an objective and simple understanding of the tortious act of defamation through a psychological investigation to the overt manifestations of our leaders or as can be inferred from their implicit thought-processes, can it be said without a cloud of controversy that any person who therefore pronounces that our leaders are corrupt is defaming them? First of, who is afraid of being defamed? From earlier established findings, only the one who has an upright and unblemished reputation can be afraid of the reward of defamation hanging over his head. Where a leader has resorted to, after careful consideration, align himself with lawlessness and perversity, what reputation is there to protect when somebody else decides to point it out? Better put, what ‘good’ image and name is there to protect, starting from the Presidency, down to most of our Governors, Local Government Chairmen and Councillors? It is quite common knowledge a present-day Nigerian politician is incompatible with a good name and reputation. After leaving office, if a former public officer fails to be rich in falsely-acquired real estates and  looted wealth, I am sorry to say, that such official was outrightly stupid! To give an outstanding example, former Delta state Governor James Ibori, is currently serving jail term in the UK for money laundering committed while in office as Governor. Could the prosecuting lawyer in the Ibori case be said to have defamed Ibori when he called Ibori a common thief? 

The Abacha family were reported to have shamelessly declared that should the Nigerian government recover all their (Abacha’ family) stolen loot, they would never be as poor as Dangote! In the same unsavoury manner, Rt.Gen. T.Y Danjuma, a former military Chief of Staff ingloriously uttered, probably in a state of stupor, that he was so rich and was bereft of what to do with money! Perhaps, these people were prompted to make those declarations by that indifferent silence particular of the Nigerian arena. The disinterestedness of many Nigerians towards political happenstances has made political office in the country a ‘loot-as-you-like’ affair. Not surprisingly though, Nigerians are still living in silence as to the whereabouts of the fuel subsidy loot, the CBN’s missing #20 billion (or is it #10 billion, as they later admitted), the Aviation Ministry’s #225 million used for procuring bullet proof cars, the unaccounted-for amount realised from the Immigration Exam Scam, and many other similar scenarios of monumental sums missing from government coffers…meanwhile, millions of the half-interred Nigerian populace don’t even have the slightest intimation of where their next meal might come from. Could anybody who portrays this truth be then said to have defamed the ‘vested interests’ concerned?

Truthfully, however, there is no exclusivity to the fact that the Nigerian society is bipolarized into the corrupt few and docile majority. That of course, is coming on the heels of the glaringly-unfact that the country has sadly been balkanized along the lines of religious zealotry and bigotry. On many occasions than necessary, the high and mighty in society had exhibited acts which brazenly negate the rule of law, but all that could ever be gotten from Nigerians was silence. Would those who choose not to remain silent by pointing out such ‘vested interests’ then be said to have defamed such ‘vested interests’? Judge for yourself. The un-peculiarity and incoherence that characterizes the momumental corruption resident within public service in the country defies any attempt at adequate description or precise classification. But, this attempt at classifying the decay in Nigerian political office is achieved at the price of the over-simplified word: ‘corruption’. And in a vaguer perception, corruption in the country has gradually and consistently become purposive without purpose. The wide and unlimited realm of corruption in the country has now made it even difficult to mentally conceptualize the antinomy called corruption.        

The crux of this piece would chiefly then appear thus: since Providence had been at least gracious to hand down the natural law that, ‘reactions must follow actions’, it is only probable and conceivable that when some ‘high and mighty’ in the society choose to poison our spirits by engaging in irregular, illegal and unlawful acts, those of us who have chosen not to remain silent- not withholding our imperfections-will have no option than to spew up defamatory words (if they so view it). For one should not be afraid to spit out ‘poisoned’ words (and in the process, offend others), how much more when shit is forced into our mouths? He who has no skeleton in his cupboard would not be apprehensive at the mere mention of skeletons, and as such, should not be afraid of being defamed.