SLOK NIGERIA LIMITED v. FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA & ORS
(2019)LCN/13151(CA)
In The Court of Appeal of Nigeria
On Wednesday, the 24th day of April, 2019
CA/L/1043C/2018
RATIO
APPEAL: IF A MATTER HAS ALREADY BEEN CONCLUDED IN ANOTHER COURT, THERE WILL BE NO NEED FOR ANOTHER COURT TO CONSIDER THE SAME MATTER BASED ON THE SAME ISSUES
Having considered and resolved the issues in the Appeal No. CA/L/1064C/2018 by the 3rd Respondent fully, it would be mere repetition to reconsider the same issues in this appeal and no practical and useful purpose would be served by such an exercise. Suffice it to state that the documentary and oral evidence of some of the witnesses placed before the Lower Court clearly shows reasonable link between the Appellant on the one hand and the 2nd & 3rd Respondents on the other, as well as transactions by which various sums of money from the bank accounts of the Abia State Government House operated by the 3rd Respondent, whose master; the 2nd Respondent, was the Governor of Abia State and the alter ego of the Appellant at the material time, were paid into the bank accounts of the Appellant.
From an over-view of the evidence adduced by the prosecution against the Appellant, the Lower Court was right to over-rule the no-case submission made for the Appellant and for reasons set out in Appeal No. CA/L/1064C/2018 by the 3rd Respondent, I resolve the Issues in this appeal against the Appellant.
In consequence, the Ruling of the Lower Court delivered on the 31st July, 2018 in the charge against the Appellant and the 2nd & 3rd Respondents, is hereby affirmed.PER MOHAMMED LAWAL GARBA, J.C.A.
JUSTICES
MOHAMMED LAWAL GARBA Justice of The Court of Appeal of Nigeria
TOM SHAIBU YAKUBU Justice of The Court of Appeal of Nigeria
JAMILU YAMMAMA TUKUR Justice of The Court of Appeal of Nigeria
Between
SLOK NIGERIA LIMITED Appellant(s)
AND
1. FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA
2. ORJI UZOR KALU
3. UDE JONES UDEOGU Respondent(s)
MOHAMMED LAWAL GARBA, J.C.A. (Delivering the Leading Judgment): The Appellant in this appeal was charged before the Federal High Court, Lagos (Lower Court) jointly with the Appellants in Appeals No. CA/L/1061C/2018 and CA/L/1064C/2018 (2nd and 3rd Respondents) for offences of conspiracy and money laundering contrary to the provisions of the Criminal Code Act, 1990 and Money Laundering Act, 2004. Each of them pleaded not guilty to all the counts of the charge and the case proceeded to trial or hearing during which the prosecution called nineteen (19) witnesses and tendered several documents in evidence in proof of the offences. At the close of the evidence adduced by the prosecution, each of the Defendants including the Appellant made a no-case to answer submission which was overruled by the Lower Court in a Ruling delivered on the 31st July, 2018 and they were ordered to enter into their respective defences to the offences.
?Because the Appellant and other Defendants (2nd and 3rd Respondents) were dissatisfied with the Ruling by the Lower Court, they brought their respective appeals, the Appellant by the Notice of Appeal
1
dated 30th July, 2018, filed on 2nd August 2018, which was amended by the Notice of Appeal filed on 4th December, 2018.
In the Appellant?s brief filed on the same 4th December, 2018, substantially the same issues as formulated in the Appeal NO. CA/L/1064C/2018, are submitted for decision by the Court in the appeal. The same issues are also raised in the 1st Respondent?s brief filed on 1st February 2019, also deemed on 7th February 2019, as in the appeal No. CA/L/1064C/2018 by the 3rd Respondent. The Appellant?s Reply brief filed on 6th February 2019, contains largely, re-arguments of the issues argued in the Appellant?s brief which dwelled on the requirement of proof of the offences the Appellant was charged for, beyond reasonable doubt by embarking on the assessment of the credibility of the witnesses and probative value of the evidence adduced by the prosecution against the Appellant. The Appellant?s brief also erroneously stated at paragraph 1:55 on page 22, that the 1st Respondent did not proffer any arguments in respect of Issue 3 in the Appellant?s brief, apparently, on the ground that the 1st Respondent?s
2
Learned SAN formulated on two (2) instead of the three (3) raised in the Appellant?s brief. However, the 1st Respondent?s Issue 2 encompasses and subsumes the Appellant?s Issues 2 and 3, the real substance of which is to question the Lower Court?s decision to over-rule the no-case submission made for the Appellant.
The 1st Respondent has comprehensively addressed and answered the Appellant?s Issues 2 and 3 under its Issue 2 from pages 17 to 58 of the 1st Respondent?s brief.
Having considered and resolved the issues in the Appeal No. CA/L/1064C/2018 by the 3rd Respondent fully, it would be mere repetition to reconsider the same issues in this appeal and no practical and useful purpose would be served by such an exercise. Suffice it to state that the documentary and oral evidence of some of the witnesses placed before the Lower Court clearly shows reasonable link between the Appellant on the one hand and the 2nd & 3rd Respondents on the other, as well as transactions by which various sums of money from the bank accounts of the Abia State Government House operated by the 3rd Respondent, whose
3
master; the 2nd Respondent, was the Governor of Abia State and the alter ego of the Appellant at the material time, were paid into the bank accounts of the Appellant.
From an over-view of the evidence adduced by the prosecution against the Appellant, the Lower Court was right to over-rule the no-case submission made for the Appellant and for reasons set out in Appeal No. CA/L/1064C/2018 by the 3rd Respondent, I resolve the Issues in this appeal against the Appellant.
In consequence, the Ruling of the Lower Court delivered on the 31st July, 2018 in the charge against the Appellant and the 2nd & 3rd Respondents, is hereby affirmed.
TOM SHAIBU YAKUBU, J.C.A.: I had the privilege of a preview of the judgment rendered by my Lord, MOHAMMED LAWAL GARBA, JCA, who meticulously and comprehensively resolved the issues thrown up in this appeal to my full satisfaction. I have nothing more useful to add.
I, too dismiss the appeal. It is lacking in merits. Therefore, the Ruling delivered by the Court below, in re-charge No: FHC/ABJ/CR/56/07, on July, 2018, is hereby affirmed,
JAMILU YAMMAMA TUKUR, J.C.A.: My learned
4
brother MOHAMMED LAWAL GARBA JCA, afforded me the opportunity of reading before today a draft copy of the lead judgment just delivered.
I adopt the judgment as mine with nothing further to add.
5
Appearances:
K.C. Nwufo, SAN with him, D. Idang and F. OkonkwoFor Appellant(s)
Rotimi Jacobs, SAN with him, A. Adeniji, G.O. Balogun and J.O. Adeyemi for the 1st Respondent.
Awa Kalu, SAN and S.E. Elema, SAN with them, A. Onum, E. Jimoh, O. Ibidike and C.I. Atume for the 2nd Respondent.
Chief Solo Akuma, SAN with him, L.U. Agu and E. Akuma for the 3rd RespondentFor Respondent(s)
Appearances
K.C. Nwufo, SAN with him, D. Idang and F. OkonkwoFor Appellant
AND
Rotimi Jacobs, SAN with him, A. Adeniji, G.O. Balogun and J.O. Adeyemi for the 1st Respondent.
Awa Kalu, SAN and S.E. Elema, SAN with them, A. Onum, E. Jimoh, O. Ibidike and C.I. Atume for the 2nd Respondent.
Chief Solo Akuma, SAN with him, L.U. Agu and E. Akuma for the 3rd RespondentFor Respondent
