A Federal High Court in Lagos on Monday refused a request by Patience Jonathan,
seeking to unfreeze her accounts,having about $15.5 million.
Justice Mohammed Idris ordered parties to file pleadings since issues had been joined as to the ownership of the money.
The judge held that all the defendants formulated different issues from those formulated by the plaintiff (EFCC) in the originating summons, saying it was unacceptable.
“The issues formulated by all the defendants are baseless. They amount to no issue and will be ignored by the court.
A Federal High Court in Lagos on Monday refused a request by Patience Jonathan,
seeking to unfreeze her accounts,having about $15.5 million.
Justice Mohammed Idris ordered parties to file pleadings since issues had been joined as to the ownership of the money.
The judge held that all the defendants formulated different issues from those formulated by the plaintiff (EFCC) in the originating summons, saying it was unacceptable.
“The issues formulated by all the defendants are baseless. They amount to no issue and will be ignored by the court.
A Federal High Court in Lagos on Monday refused a request by Patience Jonathan,
seeking to unfreeze her accounts,having about $15.5 million.
Justice Mohammed Idris ordered parties to file pleadings since issues had been joined as to the ownership of the money.
The judge held that all the defendants formulated different issues from those formulated by the plaintiff (EFCC) in the originating summons, saying it was unacceptable.
“The issues formulated by all the defendants are baseless. They amount to no issue and will be ignored by the court.
A Federal High Court in Lagos on Monday refused a request by Patience Jonathan,
seeking to unfreeze her accounts,having about $15.5 million.
Justice Mohammed Idris ordered parties to file pleadings since issues had been joined as to the ownership of the money.
The judge held that all the defendants formulated different issues from those formulated by the plaintiff (EFCC) in the originating summons, saying it was unacceptable.
“The issues formulated by all the defendants are baseless. They amount to no issue and will be ignored by the court.
A Federal High Court in Lagos on Monday refused a request by Patience Jonathan,
seeking to unfreeze her accounts,having about $15.5 million.
Justice Mohammed Idris ordered parties to file pleadings since issues had been joined as to the ownership of the money.
The judge held that all the defendants formulated different issues from those formulated by the plaintiff (EFCC) in the originating summons, saying it was unacceptable.
“The issues formulated by all the defendants are baseless. They amount to no issue and will be ignored by the court.
A Federal High Court in Lagos on Monday refused a request by Patience Jonathan,
seeking to unfreeze her accounts,having about $15.5 million.
Justice Mohammed Idris ordered parties to file pleadings since issues had been joined as to the ownership of the money.
The judge held that all the defendants formulated different issues from those formulated by the plaintiff (EFCC) in the originating summons, saying it was unacceptable.
“The issues formulated by all the defendants are baseless. They amount to no issue and will be ignored by the court.
A Federal High Court in Lagos on Monday refused a request by Patience Jonathan,
seeking to unfreeze her accounts,having about $15.5 million.
Justice Mohammed Idris ordered parties to file pleadings since issues had been joined as to the ownership of the money.
The judge held that all the defendants formulated different issues from those formulated by the plaintiff (EFCC) in the originating summons, saying it was unacceptable.
“The issues formulated by all the defendants are baseless. They amount to no issue and will be ignored by the court.
A Federal High Court in Lagos on Monday refused a request by Patience Jonathan,
seeking to unfreeze her accounts,having about $15.5 million.
Justice Mohammed Idris ordered parties to file pleadings since issues had been joined as to the ownership of the money.
The judge held that all the defendants formulated different issues from those formulated by the plaintiff (EFCC) in the originating summons, saying it was unacceptable.
“The issues formulated by all the defendants are baseless. They amount to no issue and will be ignored by the court.