The Abuja Division of the Federal High Court on Thursday ordered the Minister of Interior, Olubunmi Tunji-Ojo, and the Attorney-General of the Federation (AGF), Lateef Fagbemi, SAN, to file relevant processes in the case on the implementation of expatriates’ tax policy seven days before the next adjourned date.Justice Inyang Ekwo made the order after counsel for the minister, John Otuka, sought an adjournment to enable them to correct the mistakes in their counter affidavit filed against the plaintiff’s motion for interlocutory injunction.
Mr Ekwo, who held that on the next adjourned date, any application ripe for hearing would be taken, adjourned the matter until March 5 for further mention.
The judge on January 9 ordered the minister and the AGF to appear before him to show why the implementation of the proposed expatriates’ taxation regime should not be stopped.
The order followed the motion ex parte moved by Patrick Peter, counsel who appeared for the plaintiff, Incorporated Trustees of New Kosol Welfare Initiative.
The judge also ordered that the minister and the AGF be served with the motion within three days of the order.
The plaintiff had, in the motion ex parte marked: FHC/ABJ/CD/1780/2024, sued the interior minister and AGF as 1st and 2nd defendants.
The plaintiff filed the application through a team of lawyers led by Paul Atayi.
The group sought an order of interim injunction restraining the defendants from implementing the new expatriates taxation regime known as the ‘Expatriate Employment Levy in Nigeria’, pending the hearing and determination of the motion on notice.
When the matter was called, Mr Atayi, who represented the plaintiff, informed the court that the matter was scheduled for hearing.
He said subject to the convenience of the court he was ready to move their motion for interlocutory injunction.
Mr Otuka, though confirmed that they had been served by the plaintiff, said they filed their counter affidavit the previous day but observed there was a mistake in the heading.
The lawyer, therefore, sought an adjournment to enable them to correct the mistakes.
“You filed a counter affidavit against non-existing originating summons,” the judge said sarcastically.
“It was a mistake, my lord,” Mr Otuka responded.
AGF’s lawyer, Enoch Simon, also confirmed the receipt of the plaintiff’s documents.
Mr Simon said in response they had filed a memorandum of conditional appearance, a counter affidavit, and a statement of defence.
He said they equally intended to file a notice of preliminary objection.
The AGF’s lawyer, however, said that they were still within time to file because they were served on January 13.
Mr Atayi, who expressed surprise at the response of the defence lawyers, prayed the court to grant him leave to take their motion.
He said if the matter was adjourned without taking his motion, the defendants might tamper with the subject matter (res) of the suit.
Mr Ekwo, therefore, said that parties, having submitted themselves to the jurisdiction of the court, should be rest assured that the status quo shall be maintained.
The judge then asked Mr Simon how many days they still had to file their applications, and the lawyer said 20 days.
Leave a Reply