I KOLAWOLE PETERS DOPAMU have weighed all the options available and I must confess that all the contestants are men of great influence and character.

However, I have no hesitation in declaring my support for the PRIMUS INTER PARES amongst them. He is DEACON DELE ADESINA (SAN). DASAN

In declaring my support for DASAN I considered inter alia  integrity, character, resourcefulness, experience in bar politics and conflict resolution  prowess. I also considered relational proficiency of the candidates. I weighed each candidate on an imaginary scale before coming to the choice I made.

I find DASAN to be an effective administrator who has compassion for people. He is sympathetic to noble causes and exceptionally benevolent to needy souls.

I have known DASAN since the glorious days of Human Rights struggles as a pupil counsel in Gani Fawehinmi Chambers and I can only testify that he is a man with great vision and passion.

NBA is in dire need of a revolutionary. One who can bring the association to par with 21st century realities. DASAN exemplifies the essence of the yearnings of all men in wigs and gowns, old wigs and greenhorns!

I am persuaded that DASAN is THE MAN FOR THE JOB

Adeyemi Adewumi 106 votes
C.O Omokhafe – 18 votes
L
O.T Obisesan – 4 votes

Alh. Abubakar Ajibade – 4 Votes

*V. Chairman*
Abigail Aladejare – 132 votes, Void 2

*Financiall Secretary*

Tomide Oshakile  – 120 votes, 2votes against.

*Treasure*

Oluwaseyi Ebenezer  – 126votes, 1votes against, void 3

*Publicity Secretary -*
Adetutu Oluwaseyi  127votes,Vote against 2, void 2

*Legal Adviser*

Akomolafe Oluwaseyi  – 128votes, Void 5

*Assistant Secretary*
Bayode Kehinde –  -93 votes
Femi Falade – 40 votes

*Secretary*
Akin Borode – 59votes
Oluwatobi Ogunbiyi -74votes

Time: 4pm

Registration: https://bit.ly/ESQWebinar 

https://bit.ly/ESQWebinar

MAKE IT A DATE

I have received barrage of phone calls, all of which have conveyed the rude and shocking news to me that Granville Isetima Abibo SAN died this morning. My immediate reaction was that of total disbelief because I did not in any way see it coming. The confirmation of the news shattered and devastated me. Then pain set in. This is one death too many. Death, you have created a big vacuum that would be too hard to fill. Why? Why Granville Abibo?

I have had a sustained relationship with Granville for over Twenty (20) years. Granville was an extraordinary friend. His commitment to relationship is unsurpassable. He valued, nurtured, and sustained our relationship continually and continuously. I am yet unable to say *”Good Night”* to Granville. Granville was until his death one of our Generals in Team DASAN

To all members of Team DASAN Nationwide, I hereby direct that we suspend immediately further consultations and engagements on the ongoing Electoral process of the NBA in honour and respect of the person of our great Friend for the next Twenty-Four (24) hours. My heartfelt condolences to his wife; children; the staff of Granville Abibo & Co.; members of Nigerian Bar Association, Port-Harcourt Branch; the Body of Senior Advocates of Nigeria; and members of Team DASAN Nationwide.

I pray that God will grant us all the fortitude to bear this irreparable loss.

*Dele Adesina SAN, FCI Arb.*

Hon. Justice Peter Obiorah in his ruling delivered on 2nd June, 2020, noted that this practice of raising preliminary objections to suits filed against the defendant company has gained propensity and stated
that the “only issue for determination is whether this suit is incompetent by reason of the plaintiffs’ failure to first initiate and exhaust the procedure for complaint established under the National Electricity Regulatory Commission’s Customer Complaints Handling Standards and Procedures 2006.”

Section 3(5) of the Regulation which the EEDC relied on for the preliminary objection reads –

*All complaints must be   lodged firstly, in writing, with the Customer Complaints Unit of the Distribution Licensee.*

The court further construed Section 3(8) on method of treating the complaint by the Customer Complaints Unit; further complaint to the Forum constituted under Section 4 of the Regulation and appeal to the National Electricity Regulatory Commission against the background of Section 13 which states that:

*”Noting contained in these Regulations shall affect the rights and privileges of the customer under any other law for the time being in force, including those under the Consumer Protection Council Act No. 66 of 1992.*”

The learned trial Judge, on the vexed issue of a condition precedent, considered the cases of *Prince J. S. Atolagbe & Ors. v. Alhaji Awuni & Ors (1997) LPELR-593(SC) at 19* and relied on the decision in *Drexel Energy and Natural Resources Ltd v. Trans International (2008) LPELR-962(SC)* where the Supreme Court, per Aderemi, JSC held that “The question may be asked: What is a “CONDITION PRECEDENT?” The answer is not farfetched; When everything has happened which, prima facie, will vest in a party a certain right of action, such as the writ of summons in the instant case which contains materials of the complaint of the plaintiff/appellants and yet in this particular case there is something further to be done, or something more must happen before he is entitled to sue either by reason of provision of some statute or because the parties have expressly so agreed that something more is called “CONDITION PRECEDENT.”

Going further, the trial court stated that “a very popular form of a condition precedent is found in several legislations that prescribe the issuance and service of pre-action notice on a party before such party can be sued in court. See Section 11(2) of the Nigerian National Petroleum Act interpreted in Captain E.C.C. Amadi v. NNPC (2000) LPELR-445(SC) and Section 97(2) of the Nigerian Ports Authority Act interpreted in Umukoro v. N.P.A. (1997) 4 NWLR (Pt. 502) 656.”

His Lordship also stated that parties may expressly agree on a condition precedent and such agreements are commonly found in arbitration clauses in agreement which in unmistaken terms state that resort to arbitration must be had first before a right of action can accrue. He held that in “these situations, the legislation or agreement state so in clear and unambiguous terms. It is not a matter for conjecture or speculation. In the instant case, the Regulations did not make any allusion to a court action or that an aggrieved customer cannot approach the court until he has made the complaint to the Customer Complaints Unit. It is wrong for a person to read into a law or Regulations what is not expressly contained therein.”

Continuing the Judge held that *”In my considered opinion, what the Regulations prescribed as a channel of complaint can be an alternative to a court action. I think it depends on the customer to take advantage of that internal mechanism for resolution of complaints or he may head straight to the courts. There is absolutely nothing in the wordings of the National Electricity Regulatory Commission’s Customer Complaints Handling Standards and Procedures 2006 from where one can draw the inference that the jurisdiction of the court is ousted until and unless there is compliance with the submission of the complaint to the Customer Complaints Unit of the defendant. In fact, if there is any doubt on whether a customer can approach the court without first reporting to the Customer Complaints Unit, then Section 13 of the Regulations provided the answer or tonic to clear the doubt. In very bold and simple language it states that nothing in the Regulations “shall affect the rights and privileges of the customer under any other law for the time being in force.” In effect, the Regulation is made subject to other laws.”*

Concluding, the High Court held that  “a customer who decides to go straight to the court to ventilate his grievances against the defendant cannot be shut out by the court and compelled to first explore the internal mechanism of the defendant.  The result is that I find no merit in the preliminary objection.
It is my fervent opinion that the observance and compliance with the National Electricity Regulatory Commission’s Customer Complaints Handling Standards and Procedures 2006, is not a condition precedent to the institution of a civil action against the defendant by any aggrieved customer, like the plaintiffs in the instant case. Accordingly, I hereby dismiss the objection for lack of merit.”

Sabastine Anyia, Esq.

Our attention has been drawn to a Provisional List Of Candidates For NBA Elections 2020 believed to have been released by the ECNBA which did not include the name of our Dear Charles Ajiboye.

You will recall that our Dear Charles Ajiboye duly submitted his nomination forms for the Office of the *Assistant National Publicity Secretary* together with the required accompanying documents both electronically and physically through DHL.

Sadly, as at this time we are aware that NO information whatsoever has been received as to the omission of his name from the list.

It is our believe that it was slip error and that the ECNBA will correct same within the shortest possible time.

Please keep your faith alive, and hold your hopes up high. Charles Ajiboye is still in the race…don’t get it twisted.

Wisdom Ikhianosime,Esq.
For: Friends Of Charles Ajiboye