News

Pinnick Sues Davido, Demands N2.3b Over Alleged Breach Of Contract

Published

3 years ago

November 1, 2023

Editor

The organisers of the yearly ‘Warri Again Concert’, have filed N2.3 billion suit before the High Court of Delta State in Effurun against a Nigerian-American superstar singer, David Adedeji Adeleke, popularly known as Davido over an alleged breach of agreement/contract between them.

Listed as defendants in the suit are Davido and his music label, Davido Music Worldwide Limited.

The claimant under the name, Brownhill Investments Company Limited, through its counsel, Kelechi Onwuegbuchulem in suit number EHC/183/2023, is asking the court to award N2billion as general damages against Davido.

Specifically, the claimant is praying the court for N150million as legal and professional fees, and additional sum N30million as cost of filing the suit.

The claimant is also seeking an order directing the defendants jointly and/or severally to tender a public apology on all the 1st defendant’s social media accounts/handles and in two national daily newspapers for four consecutive days, to the claimant and attendees.

The claimant, in its statement of claim, averred that sometimes in early 2023, the 1st defendant approached its chairman, Mr. Amaju Pinnick, when they met at the Abuja Airport, to engage his (1st defendant’s) services for the 19th edition of the “Warri Again” event held on October 6, 2023.

The claimant stated that its chairman was hesitant to engage the services of the 1st defendant for the event as the defendant had disappointed him on two previous occasions – the 2014 and 2019 editions of “Warri Again”, where he did not show up to perform after he had been paid for the events and he was compelled to make refunds thereafter.

The claimant believing that the 1st defendant had turned a new leaf, entered into a performance agreement with the defendants, for the 1st defendant to perform as the headline artiste at the 19th edition of Warri Again, slated to hold on October 6, 2023 in Warri, Delta State.

The claimant stated that in the Performance Agreement dated March 30, 2023, it was agreed that the 1st defendant’s performance fee was N70million, which the defendants insisted must be paid in full at the time, to secure the 1st defendant’s performance at the event.

It averred that thereafter, the sum of US$94,500.00 (an equivalent of N70million) was paid on April 6, 2023 and same was duly acknowledged by the defendants.

After payment was made and confirmed, the 1st defendant did a promotional video for the 19th edition of the event slated, wherein he confirmed his attendance and live performance in Warri on October 6, 2023.

Thereafter, the claimant set in motion, all promotional and advertorial machinery for the event, projecting the 1st defendant as the headline performer at the event.

The claimant stated that it expended humongous resources on print and social media adverts and promotion for the event.

It further averred that on September 29, 2023, precisely a week to the slated date of the event, a formal letter of reminder was sent to the 1st defendant in respect of the event, which contained flight itinerary of the private jet chartered to personally convey the 1st defendant and his team to and from Warri, Delta State for the event.

It stated that it incurred additional expenses of $18,000 to secure the private jet chartered to convey the Davido (1st defendant) and his team.

It stated that on October 6, 2023, the claimant tried to reach the defendants severally but all attempts proved futile.

Regardless, the claimant kept the private jet, it chartered to convey the 1st defendant and his team to Warri, at the Airport in Lagos on standby, waiting for the 1st defendant and his team.

The claimant added that it released a public notice that it had met all necessary performance agreements in respect of securing the performance of the 1st defendant at Warri Again and had not received any communication from the defendants, relating to his attendance at the event.

It stated that in the course of the event, its chairman, Pinnick, was compelled to address and apologise to the event attendees for the nonappearance and performance of the 1st defendant as the attendees expressed disappointment upon learning that the 1st defendant was not in attendance to perform.

He explained to the disappointed attendees that the claimant met all its contractual obligations to secure the attendance and performance of the 1st defendant but he deliberately refused to show up and perform.

Pinnick further revealed on stage to the unhappy attendees, that the claimant had taken steps to secure the performance of another raving artist known as Crown Uzama aka Shallipopi, at an extra and unbudgeted cost to make up for the absence and non performance of the 1st defendant.

The claimant added that the 1st defendant, not long after, resorted to bullying Pinnick, with his large social media influence and following by posting all manner of insults, defamatory remarks, threats and unprintable things on the accounts/handies of his Instagram, Snapchat and X (formerly known as Twitter], at its chairman.

The 1st defendant made a false post on his Instagram story, stating that he had informed the claimant months ago of his inability to attend and perform at the event.

It averred that at no point in time did the defendants communicate or relate to the claimant that the 1st defendant would not attend and no longer perform at the “Warri Again” event.

It added that other show promoters and persons have been victims of the 1st defendant’s penchant for reneging on contracts and engagements after collecting payments.

Consequently, it is asking for the payment of $94,500 as full payment for engaging the services of the 1st defendant.

It is also demand an order directing the defendants jointly to tender a public apology on their social media accounts/handles and in two national daily newspapers for four consecutive days.

It further asked the court for an order of injunction restraining the 1st defendant from performing as a musical artiste at any show/event in Nigeria until he refunds the sum of $94,500.

News

Xenophobic Attacks: Oshiomhole Tells FG To Retaliate Against South African Companies In Nigeria

Published

11 hours ago

May 5, 2026

Editor

Senator Adams Oshiomhole has called on the Federal Government to retaliate against South African businesses operating in Nigeria following the recent attacks on Nigerians in South Africa.

Speaking during plenary on Tuesday, Oshiomhole said the Federal Government should consider revoking the working license of South African owned companies such as MTN and DSTV.

He argued that Nigeria must respond firmly to what he described as persistent hostility against its citizens.

“I am not going to shed tears. If you hit me, I hit you. I think it is appropriate in diplomacy. It is an economic struggle,” Oshiomhole said.

He argued that while some South Africans accuse Nigerians of taking their jobs, Nigerians should return home and take over employment opportunities created by major South African companies operating in the country, including MTN and DSTV.

“When we hit back, the President of South Africa will not only talk but will also go on his knees to recognise that Nigeria cannot be intimidated.

“We will not condone any life being lost. If a crime has been committed under the South African law they have the right to bring any such person to justice, but to kill our people as if we are helpless, we will not allow that,” Oshiomhole added.

DAILY POST reports that several Nigerians in South Africa have reportedly been attacked, and their businesses destroyed, in ongoing xenophobic attacks in the country.

News

IGP Orders Officers Display Name Tag On Uniform, Gives Update On State Police

Published

11 hours ago

May 5, 2026

Editor

The Inspector General of Police, IGP, Tunji Disu, has ordered all police personnel to always have their name tags on their uniforms for easy identification.

Disu disclosed that only police personnel who are undercover are exempted from displaying their name tags.

Speaking on Tuesday, Disu said: “All police officers should have their name tags. All of us on the high table have our names apart from the undercover among us so if you look at all the Commissioners of Police we have our name tags, so it’s not our standard.

News

Court Orders SERAP To Pay DSS Operatives N100m For Defamation

Published

16 hours ago

May 5, 2026

Editor

The High Court of the Federal Capital Territory has ordered a non-governmental organization, the Socio-Economic Rights and Accountability Project, SERAP, to pay N100 million as damaged to two operatives of the Department of the State Services, DSS, for unjustly defaming them in some publications.

The court also ordered SERAP to tender public apologies to the defamed officers,
Sarah John and Gabriel Ogundele, in two national newspapers, two television stations and its website.

Besides, the organization was also ordered to pay the two operatives N1 million as cost of litigation and 10 percent post-judgment interest annually on the judgment sum until it’s fully liquidated.

Justice Yusuf Halilu of the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory gave the order on Tuesday while delivering judgment in a N5.5 billion defamation suit instituted against SERAP by the DSS operatives.

The judge found SERAP liable for unjustly defaming the two DSS operatives with allegations that they unlawfully invaded its Abuja office, harassed and intimidated its staff, in September 2024.

In the offending publication on its website and Twitter handle, SERAP alleged that the two operatives unlawfully invaded and occupied its office with sinister motives.

The judge held that the publication was in bad taste especially from an organization established to promote transparency and accountability, as nothing in the publication was found to be truthful.

The DSS staff had listed SERAP as 1st defendant in the suit marked CV/4547/2024. SERAP’s Deputy Director, Kolawole Oluwadare, was listed as the 2nd defendant.

In the suit, the claimants – Sarah John and Gabriel Ogundele – accused the two defendants of making false claims that they invaded SERAP’s Abuja office on September 9, 2024..

Counsel to the DSS, Oluwagbemileke Samuel Kehinde, had while adopting his final address in the mater urged the judge to grant all the reliefs sought by his client in the interest of justice.

He admitted that although the names of the two claimants were not mentioned in the defamation materials, they had however established substantial circumstances that they are the ones referred to in the published defamation article by SERAP on its website.

The counsel submitted that all ingredients of defamation have been clearly established and the offending publication referred to the two officials of the secret police.

However, SERAP, through its counsel, Victoria Bassey from Tayo Oyetibo, SAN, law firm, asked the court to dismiss the suit on the ground that the two claimants did not establish that they were the ones referred to in the alleged defamation materials.

She said that SERAP used “DSS officials” in the alleged offending publication, adding that the two claimants must establish that they are the ones referred to before their case can succeed.

Similar arguments were canvassed by Oluwatosin Adefioye who stood for the second defendant, adding that there was no dispute in the September 9, 2024 operation of DSS in SERAP’s office.

He said that since SERAP in the publication did not name any particular person, the claimants must plead special circumstances that they were the ones referred to as the DSS officials.

Besides, he said that there is no organization by name Department of State Services in law, hence, DSS cannot claim being defamed adding that the only entity known to law is National Security Agency.

The claimants had in the suit stated that the alleged false claim by SERAP has negatively impacted on their reputation.

The DSS also stated, in the statement of claim, that, in line with the agency’s practice of engaging with officials of non-governmental organisations operating in the FCT to establish a relationship with their new leadership, it directed the two officials – John and Ogunleye – to visit SERAP’s office and invite them for a familiarization meeting.

The claimants added that in carrying out the directive, John and Ogunleye paid a friendly visit to SERAP’s office at 18 Bamako Street, Wuse Zone 1, Abuja on September 9 and met with one Ruth, who upon being informed about the purpose of the visit, claimed that none of SERAP’s management staff was in the country and advised that a formal letter of invitation be written by the DSS.

John and Ogundele, who claimed that their interactions with Ruth were recorded, said before they immediately exited SERAP’s office, Ruth promised to inform her organisation’s management about the visit and volunteered a phone number – 08160537202.

They said it was surprising that, shortly after their visit, SERAP posted on its X (Twitter) handle – @SERAPNigeria – that officers of the DSS are presently unlawfully occupying its office.

The claimant added, “On the same day, the defendants also published a statement on SERAP’s website, which was widely reported by several media outfits, falsely alleging that some officers from the DSS, described as “a tall, large, dark-skinned woman” and “a slim, dark skinned man,” invaded their Abuja office and interrogated the staff of the first defendant (SERAP).

John and Ogundele stated that “due to the false statements published by the defendants, the DSS has been ridiculed and criticised by international agencies such as the Amnesty International and prominent members of the Nigerian society, such as Femi Falana (SAN)”.

“Due to the false statements published by the defendants, members of the public and the international community formed the opinion that the Federal Government is using the DSS to harass the defendants.”

They added that the defendants’ statements caused harm to their reputation because the staff and management of the DSS have formed the opinion that the claimants did not follow orders and carried out an unsanctioned operation and are therefore, incompetent and unprofessional.

The claimants therefore prayed the court for the following reliefs: “An order directing the defendants to tender an apology to the claimants via the first defendant’s (SERAP’s) website, X (twitter) handle, two national daily newspapers (Punch and Vanguard) and two national news television stations (Arise Television and Channels Television) for falsely accusing the claimants of unlawfully invading the first defendant’s office and interrogating the first defendant’s staff.

“An order directing the defendants to pay the claimants the sum of N5 billion as damages for the libellous statements published about the claimants.

“Interest on the sum of N5b at the rate of 10 percent per annum from the date of judgment until the judgment sum is realised or liquidated.

“An order directing the defendants to pay the claimants the sum of N50 million as costs of this action.”