Business

CAMA: Court Dismisses CAN’s Suit Against CAC, Trade Minister

Published

4 years ago

December 3, 2021

A Federal High Court, Abuja has dismissed a suit filed by the Christian Association of Nigeria against the Corporate Affairs Commission and the Minister of Industry, Trade and Investment.

Justice Inyang Ekwo, in a judgment, dismissed the suit over the failure of the plaintiff to comply with the law in the name used in filing the originating summons.

“Therefore, this application lacks merit and ought to be dismissed and I hereby make an order dismissing same,” he declared.

The News Agency of Nigeria reports that while the Incorporated Trustees of Christian Association of Nigeria is the plaintiff in the suit, the CAC and the Minister of Industry, Trade and Investment are 1st and 2nd defendants respectively.

The plaintiff, in an originating summons marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/244/2021, had prayed the court to determine “whether Section 839, subsections (1), (7) (a) and (10) of the Companies and Allied Matters Act (CAMA), 2020, is inconsistent with Sections 4(8), 6(6)(b) and 40 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended) which guarantees the plaintiff’s right to freedom of association and the right to seek redress in court.

“Whether the provision of Section 854 of the CAMA is inconsistent with Section 39 of the CFRN which guarantees the right to freedom of expression,” among others.

Part of the reliefs sought by the plaintiff include “a declaration that Section 839(1), (7) (a) and (10) of the CAMA are inconsistent with Section 40 of the CFRN and thus unconstitutional, null and void.

“A declaration that Section 839(1), (7) (a) and (10) of the CAMA are inconsistent with Section 4(8) of the CFRN and thus unconstitutional, null and void.

“A declaration that Section 839(1) and (7) (a) of the CAMA are inconsistent with Section 36(1) of the CFRN and thus unconstitutional, null and void.

“A declaration that Section 839(1) and (7) (a) of the CAMA has a direct effect on the judicial power of the court under Section 6(6) (b) of the CFRN, and Is therefore void.

“An order striking down Sections 839(1), (7) (a) & (10), 842(1) and (2), 843, 851 and 854 of the CAMA for being unconstitutional.

“A declaration that Section 17(2) (a) & (d) of the CAMA demand an impossible and impracticable action; thus, void.

“An Order striking down Section 17 (2) (a) & (d) of the CAMA for being impracticable and unknown to Law.”

However, in the course of the proceedings, CAN brought an application, praying for an order to amend the originating summons and accompanying processes by replacing the word, “INCORPORATED” with “REGISTERED” in the name of the plaintiff in the suit such that it would read, “The Registered Trustees of the Christian Association of Nigeria.”

The application was filed on the grounds that the name expressed in its certificate of incorporation is the “Registered Trustees of the Christian Association of Nigeria” and not “Incorporated Trustees of Christian Association of Nigeria.”

It stated further that in the originating summons, the plaintiff’s name was inadvertently expressed as “Incorporated Trustees of the Christian Association of Nigeria.”

“This error in the plaintiff’s name was as a result of the inadvertence of counsel.

“The error in the plaintiff’s name is what we seek by this application to rectify,” it added.

The plaintiff argued that it was an oversight on the part of the counsel who prepared the draft of the processes.

In its counter affidavit, the CAC had opposed the plaintiff’s suit, challenging the propriety of the constitution of the parties and competence of the plaintiff.

It argued that “The Incorporated Trustees of the Christian Association of Nigeria;” as a non-juristic person, was unknown to law to institute and maintain the action.

“The plaintiff is not an entity registered under the Companies and Allied Matters Act and not one otherwise recognised as being vested with statutory rights of incorporation and bereft of the requisite locus standi, legal capacity or competence to sue and maintain this action eo nomine against the 1st defendant.

Religious violators’ list: Persecution persists, state your criteria, CAN tells US
“The certificate of incorporation, Exh. P1, is a certificate of Christian Association of Nigeria and not the plaintiff.

“The plaintiff being the party invoking the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court is not a juristic person and incompetent to do so.

“The amendment which the plaintiff seeks is not one to cure a mere misnomer but an amendment to give life to the originating processes by substituting a non-juristic person with a juristic person.

“The originating process of the plaintiff is incurably defective and cannot be cured by an amendment.

“This court cannot by an order, breathe life on an otherwise lifeless and/or non-existent entity.”

The CAC insisted that granting the application would change the character of the case and would be prejudicial to it.

Delivering judgment, Justice Ekwo said he had taken a look at the certificate of incorporation of the plaintiff attached to the origination summons as Exh. P1 and found that the name on the certificate is ‘The Registered Trustees of Christian Association of Nigeria.”

“Further peruse shows that the certificate was issued under the regime of the Land (Perpetual Succession) Act, Cap. 98 of the 1958 LFN on 19th December, 1986.

“This means that the plaintiff was registered before CAMA first came into effect in 1990.

“With this evidence, it means the plaintiff can only sue and be sued in the name on the certificate issued to it on 19th December, 1986,” he said.

He cited a previous case to back his stand.

“There must be consequential order in the circumstance of this case.

“The originating processes in the name of ‘The Registered Trustees of Christian Association of Nigeria’ cannot stand.

“Similarly, it is my opinion that this ruling has therefore also resolved the issue in the preliminary objection of the 1st defendant too.

“I find that the plaintiff did not comply with the law in the name used in filing its originating summons.

“Therefore, this application lacks merit and ought to be dismissed and I hereby make an order dismissing same,” he ruled.

The judge added that the ruling affected the foundation of the case going by the defect in the name by which the plaintiff commenced the matter.

“I therefore make an order striking out the entire case. This is the order of this court,” Ekwo held.

(NAN)

Business

Dangote Fuel Sells Cheaper In Togo Than In Nigeria – Falana Laments

Published

4 days ago

September 15, 2025

Editor

Human rights activist Femi Falana, SAN, has lamented that fuel taken from Dangote is cheaper in Togo than in Nigeria.

Falana expressed his concerns on Sunday while responding to questions in an interview on Politics Today, a programme on Channels Television.

He urged the federal government to review the proposed 5 per cent fuel surcharge and ensure that further hardship is not imposed on Nigerians.

“I guess the government wants to go back to the drawing table and ensure that it is not accused of multiple taxes or double taxation because consumers will pay VAT for buying fuel. They will now put an additional 5 per cent tax.

“I think this is what Nigerians are complaining about. And from what we just read today is that the Dangote fuel taken from Nigeria is now cheaper in Togo than in Nigeria I think about 65 naira.

“So, the government will have to review these developments (the proposed 5 per cent fuel surcharge) and ensure more hardship is not imposed on Nigerians,” he said.

Business

Falana Reveals Those Behind Subsidy Removal

Published

4 days ago

September 15, 2025

Editor

A Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Femi Falana, has once again criticised President Bola Tinubu’s removal of the fuel subsidy.

Speaking in an interview on Sunday’s Politics, a programme on Channels Television, the human rights activist stated that no country in the world has completely abolished subsidies.

“There’s no way you can remove subsidy completely. No country in the entire world has abolished subsidies completely.

“Even leading Western countries like the United States, the United Kingdom, France and others subsidise electricity, agriculture, and many aspects of the lives of their people.

“So, when the Nigerian Government said it was removing subsidies, as a matter of fact, if I must say this, it was the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund, IMF, that insisted that the government must remove all subsidies,” he said.

Business

‘We Like Greek Gifts,’ Nigerians Blast NUPENG Over Dangote’s Fuel Price Reduction

Published

5 days ago

September 13, 2025

Editor

The decision of the Nigeria Union of Petroleum and Natural Gas Workers (NUPENG) to warn Nigerians against accepting Dangote Refinery’s recent fuel price reduction has drawn heavy backlash on social media, with many citizens mocking the union and embracing what they described as “much-needed relief.”

Dangote had announced lower petrol pump prices in several states alongside a new scheme to deploy compressed natural gas (CNG) trucks directly to filling stations, a move expected to reduce logistics costs.

But NUPENG dismissed the offer as a “Greek gift,” alleging that the refinery was undermining workers’ rights, sidelining the union, and pushing drivers into a rival association.

However, netizens have lambasted the union, querying that during hard times, NUPENG has never supported the masses.

On X (formerly Twitter), Nigerians quickly turned NUPENG’s warning into a trending topic, using humour and sarcasm to lampoon the union.

Oloye Somorin Osifeso (@OloyeSomorin) wrote: “We like Greek gifts in my garage.”

Just Jude (@JustJude) asked bluntly: “Is it your deception?”

Oladele (@Oladele) quipped: “As Dangote Refinery dey offer Nigerians Greek gift, why can’t NUPENG too offer Nigerians French gift?”

Agbalaka (@Agbalaka) queried: “Can they tell Nigerians what exactly they are fighting about?”

CBN Gov Akinsola (@Akinsola) joked: “Then give us Trojan gift now 😆. Man do man. Man no go vex.”

Omobalaji (@Omobalaji) teased: “NUPENG, oya surprise us with Arabian gifts.”

Habdulakeem Bahdmus (@BahdmusHabdulakeem) added: “If Dangote is showering Nigerians with Greek gift, NUPENG can also set up a Roman gift now.”

Femi Yekinni (@FemiYekinni) steered it back to reality: “We thank them for their advice. Now, @DangoteGroup pls how do we schedule deliveries to Badagry?”

Curtis Abbi (@CurtisAbbi) slammed the union: “Nigerians will manage the Greek gift. @officialNUPENG9, what gift have you given Nigerians in your entire years of existence? NUPENG should offer Nigerians their own Somalian gift 🤣.”

Akin Adejola (@AkinAdejola) echoed the sentiment: “LOL. I can bet Nigerians don’t mind the gift. NUPENG should gift Nigerians same ‘Greek gift’ too if they have any goodwill. NUPENG is the enemy of progress in the oil & gas sector.”

Adeola Akinwande (@adeolarewaju9) criticised union leaders: “Does NUPENG remember Nigerians at hard times? They have all failed Nigerians the same way the @NLCHeadquarters has failed. They are living big on unionism and cashing out big time. Without unionism, some of their excos are nobody. They should stop the crocodile tears.”

Okunwa U. U. Azikiwe (@OkunwaUUazikiwe) argued: “Competition has created jealousy by the previous monopoly in the sale of fuel. They have lost control, and it is paining them that they are no longer in control. SMH!!!”

Solihull Abdulkareem (@SolihullAbdul) chipped in: “NUPENG or whatever, do you want the market to be monopoly? You’ve been doing what you want for many years. It’s time for change, just accept it and move forward.”

Temidayo (@Temidayo) asked: “It’s a lie. What benefits has your union provided for Nigerians? Middlemen syndrome has been room for corruption. Your association should go and buy shares in Dangote and work together to make Nigeria great.”

And LegalTech Sam Akanbi (@SamAkanbi) summed up: “Nigerians no longer want your Nigerian gift, we want the Greek gift. If you have a better offer, we’d abandon Dangote’s Greek gift and take yours. But for now, let the Greek gift go round.”

Recall that NUPENG earlier alleged that Dangote Refinery was forcing truck drivers to abandon its union for a rival group, the Direct Trucking Company Drivers Association (DTCDA).

The union also accused Dangote of undermining collective bargaining rights and violating a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) signed under government supervision.

Dangote, however, denies the claims, insisting that union membership remains voluntary and that its delivery scheme is designed to cut costs and ease supply.

The federal government has intervened, with the Ministry of Labour and the Department of State Services mediating between both parties.