A Federal High Court in Lagos on Thursday stopped Ekocorp Plc and Goff Ohen Limited from having any board meetings, either individually or through their representatives, pending the conclusion of Dr Sunday Kuku’s lawsuit.
Dr Kuku is a director of Ekocorp, which runs the famed Eko Hospital in Ikeja, Lagos, and is the sole surviving founder member.
Following an interlocutory injunction submitted and contested by Kuku’s attorney, Mr Tobe Nnamani, Justice Peter Lifu issued the order of restraint.
The first to eighth defendants in the claim are Ekocorp Plc, Goff Ohen Limited; Dr Goff Ohen; Prof Joseph. Irukwu, SAN; Pastor Olurotimi Nathaniel; Mr Olusegun Olusanya; Dr. George Okpagu; and Mrs Joyce Modilim.
Justice Lifu also held: “I have perused the application for interlocutory injunction filed by the plaintiff in this case and the submissions of counsel to the applicant.
“In my humble view, the issue here is basically to preserve the res from being dissipated so that the decision, in this case, will meet the purpose.
“Consequently this application is hereby granted as prayed against the first and second defendants.
“I can observe that only the first and second defendants were duly served. Activities of the board are hereby suspended during the pendency of this case.
“The literal interpretation is that no meeting, no notice and gathering of board members in whatsoever capacity until this case is determined one way or the order.”
In issuing the ruling, the judge stated that he was not unconcerned about the hospital’s operations and that the management should continue to do so while the case is pending.
According to the judge, Dr Kuku is also required to give an undertaking as to damages in court “should it prove out that this order should not have been imposed.”
He directed that the matter be given an expedited hearing and that the hearing be postponed until December 6, 2021.
Earlier, Mr Andrew Igboekwe SAN, counsel for the 2nd and 3rd defendants, told the court of an application challenging the court’s jurisdiction to hear the case.
However, because the motion was made after the matter had been deferred for judgment, Justice Lifu regarded it as an attempt to stop the ruling.
