Estate of late Janet Dada: Court orders Claimant to be present in court to resolve issue of identity
By Onyewuchi Ojinnaka
Justice Latifat Folami of High Court of Lagos, Ikeja, has ordered Mr Ronald Lanier to be present in court on next adjourned date to resolve the issue of his identity as claimant in the suit marked ID5526GCM/2022.
Mr Ronald Lanier, an American and claimant in suit marked ID5526GCM/2022 in the matter of Estate of Janet Abimbola Dada before a High Court of Lagos sitting at Ikeja, had through his counsel Olawole Araromi and John Alade of LEXX & SOPHY moved and argued application seeking the special leave of the court permitting his non-physical attendance in court to testify to the authenticity of his identity; the special leave of the court permitting and using his affidavit and counter affidavits regarding the authenticity of his identity as his evidence in respect of same; and for such further or other orders as the court may deem fit to make in the circumstances of this application.
Moving the motion before Justice Latifat Folami on October 22, Mr Araromi submitted that the application dated October 8, 2024, was supported with 11-paragraphs affidavit dated same day and with a written address. He submitted that two exhibits RLL1 which are the affidavit of facts deposed to by the claimant in the United States of America (USA) and RLL2 were attached to the application.
While addressing the court, Mr Araromi submitted that his client has given copious reasons supported by the documents detailing why he cannot appear before the court. He particularly mentioned the danger inherent, such as the threat to the claimant’s personal liberty and life. In addition, his journey to Nigeria with his wife will further deplete the estate of the deceased, which is the res of the matter.
He submitted that the 1st and 2nd defendants lied and deceived the court to obtain the ruling ordering the claimant to appear in court physically, as they would not bear the cost of the claimant coming down to Nigeria to testify before the court.
Mr. Araromi argued that since the 1st defendant/respondent has confirmed, acknowledged and admitted the identity of the claimant in writing on several occasions as supported by the claimant’s uncontradicted affidavit and exhibits, the issue is therefore no longer in contention and has become a mere academic exercise, which the court is discouraged from engaging in by law.
In making his submissions, Mr. Araromi referred the court to the supporting paragraphs of the affidavits together with the corresponding exhibits; and pointed out that they were not contradicted by the 1st and 2nd Defendants. He therefore argued that according to law, the court should deem the depositions admitted and should adopt them as such. He urged the court to grant the application as prayed.
In opposing the application of the claimant, the 1st and 2nd defendants /respondents represented by Mr Julius Ayoola Esq. filed 18-paragraphs counter affidavit dated October 21, 2024, and a written address filed same day
Ayoola submitted that under Order 37, Rule 1, on which the application was brought, the court has considered all the issues raised other than the age of the claimant.
In the 1st and 2nd defendants /respondents particulars of facts in their counter affidavit, they averred that the claimant /Applicant had in application for order of virtual hearing claimed to be working at UPS and would not be allowed to travel but immediately we filed an objection, the same claimant /Applicant became UPS retiree.
Also addressing the court, Mr. Ayoola submitted that the claimant /Applicant is not a deponent to the affidavit. He submitted that the affidavit was deposed by his counsel and not the claimant. He said that the claimant can argue his case without blackmailing or scandalising the court.
After listening to counsel to Parties, Justice Folami adjourned ruling on the application to November 11, 2024.which was later delivered on November 19
In his ruling which was delivered on a week later, Justice Folami after reading the arguments, submissions and plethora of cases cited by parties, held this: “the court is therefore not inclined in the circumstances to grant special leave to the claimant in this case.
” Also due to the irreconcilable nature of the Police Investigation Report and the content of exhibit RLL2, this court once again orders that the claimant must be present before the honourable court to resolve the issue of his identity. I do order”
The matter was adjourned to December 16 for hearing.
Recall that a Lagos based legal practitioner, Mr. Oluyomi Dada, and one Mr. Ademola Dada were sued by the claimant Mr. Ronald Lanier, an American, for allegedly obtaining through deceit and fraud Letters of Administration dated December 16, 2021 of the estate of late Miss Janet Abinbola (Abimbola) Dada, an American/Nigerian, and selling one of the houses of the deceased in Victoria Island unlawfully.
The claimant, on his behalf and his siblings, filed the suit marked ID/5526GCM/2022 in 2022 at the Lagos High Court, Ikeja division. He is claiming amongst others that the Probate Registrar (the 3rd Defendant) ought not to have granted the Letters of Administration because the estate was the subject of another suit against Mr. Yomi Dada and the Probate Registrar which was pending at the time, and he (claimant) had filed a caveat against the application for the Letters of Administration in the Estate of Janet Dada.