THE OFFICIAL REPORT OF THE LEGAL PROCEEDINGS 8TH OF APRIL , 2013 The Supreme Court Of Nigeria Between Comandclem Nigeria Limited And Mobil Producing Nigeria Unlimited SUIT NUMBER:SC.69/2011

THE OFFICIAL REPORT OF
THE LEGAL PROCEEDINGS
8TH OF APRIL , 2013
The Supreme Court Of Nigeria
Between
Comandclem Nigeria Limited
And
Mobil Producing Nigeria Unlimited
SUIT NUMBER:SC.69/2011

Content
(1) Background Information.
(2) Pre-Hearing Preparations Of Comandclem Nigeria Limited And Mobil Oil For 8th Of April, 2013 Case.
- CCNL Strategic Approach To The Apex Court
- Mobil Oil Strategic Approach To The Apex Court
(3) Motion On Notice Filed By The Litigants.
(4) The Proceedings Of 8th Of April, 2013 In The Supreme Court Of Nigeria
(5) Blow By Blow Account Of Arguments Of Lawyers On The Cross Appeal Filed By Mobil Producing Nigeria Unlimited
(6) The Rulings of the Supreme Court of Nigeria On 8th Of April, 2013
(7) The Interpretation Of The Rulings Of Justice Mahmud Mohammed On Cross Appeal Filed By Mobil Producing Nigeria Unlimited
(8) The Impacts Of The Rulings Of Court (Justice Mahmud Mohammed) On Suit Sc./69/2011
(9) Personal Opinions Of Anti-Corrosive Vanguards On The Rulings Of Court (Justice Mahmud Mohammed)
(10) Date Of Next Hearing Of The Suit No SC./69/2011
(11) Conclusion

PAGE 1 OF 11
Background Information
On 29th of January, 2013, the teaming lovers and supporters of King Professor CJA Uwemedimoh across the globe were disappointed but apparently hopeful while in the court room in realization of the facts that the Supreme Court of Nigeria fallaciously assigned the case (SC.69/2011) of patent right infringement litigation and breach of sole supplier agreement between Comandclem Nigeria Limited and Mobil Producing Nigeria Unlimited to Honourable Justice Kumai Bayang Akaahs being one of the five (5) Honourable Justices of the Apex Court Of The Land to adjudicate the thirteen years old case.
Honourable Justice Kumai Bayang Akaahs being one of the three (3) Justices of the Federal Court of Appeal, Calabar Judicial Division that gave substantive verdict on the contested issues set-aside for determination between Comandclem Nigeria Limited and Mobil Oil on 8th of December, 2009, lacks judicial capacity to entertain the same contested issues between the same parties twice haven being promoted to the Supreme Court of Nigeria. It is axiomatic in the Nigerian Judicial System that a judge cannot preside over his appeal. In realization of this judicial truism, the case between Comandclem Nigeria Limited and Mobil Producing Nigeria Unlimited was shifted forward to 8th of April, 2013.

PAGE 2 OF 11
Pre-Hearing Preparations of
Comandclem Nigeria Limited
and Mobil Oil

CCNL Strategic Approach To The Apex Court
King Professor CJA Uwemedimoh hired the services of Barrister Rev. Jesse-Daniels Onuigbo Esq of over twenty-two (22) years legal experience/knowledge in the Nigerian case laws to lead the legal team of Comandclem Nigeria Limited to the Supreme Court of Nigeria. This professional legal luminary called Barrister Rev. Jesse-Daniels Onuigbo Esq displayed high level of expertise on the assumption of office in this case of patent right infringement and breach of sole supplier status between Comandclem Nigeria Limited and Mobil Producing Nigeria Unlimited.
He believes that there are some motions/processes which should have been filed in the Federal High Court, Calabar Judicial Division before Justice Gladys K. Olotu but were omitted. As a result of this, he filed some motions/processes before the apex court of the land to enable the honorable justices of the Supreme Court of Nigeria to get acclimatize with the true picture and totality of a 13-year-old case, though some of the motions/processes, he anticipated may be refused.
Barrister Rev. Jesse-Daniels Onuigbo Esq filed the following motions among other processes in the Apex Court Of The Land.

PAGE 3 OF 11
Motion On Notice Filed By The Litigants.
(A) Motion On Notice Dated 6th of February, 2012 praying the court for the followings.
(1) An order of court granting leave to the Appellants/Applicants to amend their notice and grounds of appeal, and file an amended Appellant brief thereto.
(2) For the “Amended Notice and Grounds of Appeal” and “Amended Appellants Brief” annexed hereof and marked Exhibit V & VI respectively to be deemed to be duly filed and served relevant court fees having been paid.
(3) An order of court granting leave to the Appellants/Applicants to file additional documents in support of their claims.
(4) An order of court setting down this appeal for hearing.
(5) An order of accelerated hearing in this appeal.
(6) And for such further order or orders as this Honourable court may deem fit to make in the circumstances.

(B) Motion On Notice Dated 6th of February, 2012 praying the court for the followings.
(1) An order of court joining the Party Sought to be Joined as Second Respondent in this suit.
(2) An order that all the court processes in this appeal be served on the Party Sought to be joined at the head office of the Respondent at Mobil House, Lekki Express Way, Victoria Island Lagos, or alternatively, through courier service at the EXXONNMOBIL CORPORATION HEAD QUARTERS, 5959 LAS COLINAS BOULEVARD, IRVING , TEXAS, UNITED STATES 75039-2298, (972) 444-1000.
(3) And for such further order or orders as the Honourable Court may deem fit to make in the circumstance.

(C) Motion On Notice Dated 20th of December, 2012 praying the Honourable court for an order to consolidate all the processes of the court in suit no sc.198/2005 with those in the Substantive suit number sc./69/2011.

Mobil Oil Strategic Approach To The Apex Court
On the other hand, the Legal Counsel of Mobil Producing Nigeria Unlimited - Mike Ozekhome and Eyimofe Atake filed the following processes /motions.
(1) A Substantive Cross Appeal Dated 20th of March, 2012.
(2) Respondent’s Reply Brief to the Original Appellant Brief of Argument of CCNL filed by former lawyer- (Dr. Tony Ukam)


PAGE 4 OF 11
The Proceedings Of 8th Of April, 2013 In
The Supreme Court Of Nigeria

On 8th of April, 2013, the teaming supporters and lovers of King Professor CJA Uwemedimoh across the globe were present in the Supreme Court of Nigeria to watch the life proceedings of a (13) thirteen-year-old case being re-litigated in the Supreme Court of Nigeria for the second times on the same contested issues between the same parties- Comandclem Nigeria Limited and Mobil Producing Nigeria Unlimited. King Professor CJA Uwemedimoh was also in the court room with his close associates, family members and friends & well-wishers to hear the pronouncements of the Apex Court of the land on motions/processes regularizations before the Honourable Justices of the zenith court of the nation.
Honourable Justice Mahmud Mohammed was the presiding judge supported by Honourable Justice Mary Peter Odili, Honourable Justice Kayode Ariwoola and (2) other Honourable Justice at press time, we don’t know. Comandclem Nigeria Limited was represented by Barrister Rev. Jesse-Daniels Onuigbo Esq,and Ogunbodede Esq while Mobil Producing Nigeria Unlimited was represented by Chief Mike Ozekhome and (8) others legal luminaries.
Honourable Justice Mahmud Mohammed who was the presiding judge ruled substantially on all the motions on notice before the Supreme Court of Nigeria filed by either the legal counsels of Comandclem Nigeria limited or Mobil Producing Nigeria Unlimited. For the purpose of this report, we shall x-ray in details The Substantive Cross Appeal filed by Mobil Producing Nigeria Unlimited on 11th of April, 2012, and signed & dated by Dr. Eyimofe Atake on 20th of March, 2012. In our subsequent publications, we shall consider other motions on notice regularized by the Supreme Court of Nigeria on 8th of April, 2013 in the suit number SC./69/2011. Thanks for your understanding.

PAGE 5 OF 11
Blow By Blow Account Of Arguments Of Lawyers
On The Cross Appeal Filed
By Mobil Producing Nigeria Unlimited
The conversation below exhibited how litigants argued on the cross appeal filed by Mobil Producing Nigeria unlimited on 8th of April, 2013 before the Honourable Justices of the Supreme Court Of Nigeria. Happy reading.
Court (Justice Mahmud Mohammed)
Do we have any order motion on notice before this court?
Mike Ozekhome (Mobil Oil)
My lord, we have a motion on notice dated 23th of March, 2012 but filed 11th of April 2012.
Court (Justice Mahmud Mohammed)
Is the motion on notice signed by Dr. Atake?
Mike Ozekhome (Mobil Oil)
Yes Sir. It was signed by Dr. Atake.
Court (Justice Mahmud Mohammed)
Under which rule of this court are you filing this motion on notice?
Mike Ozekhome (Mobil Oil)
My lord, we are bringing our motion on notice under:
-Order 2, Rule 31, Section 1,
- Order 6, Rule 1, of the Rules of the Supreme Court of Nigeria of 1985 as amended and other inherent jurisdiction of this honourable court, my lord.
Court (Justice Mahmud Mohammed)
Barrister Onuigbo, this application is just a sort of application to file a cross appeal with you so that your Amended Notice Of Appeal, and Cross Appeal of Mobil Oil could be heard together. Barrister Onuigbo, any objection to this application?
Barrister Rev. Jesse-Daniels Onuigbo Esq (CCNL)
My lord, we filed a counter-affidavit against this application.
Court (Justice Mahmud Mohammed)
You filed a counter-affidavit! You see? The cross appeal of Mobil Oil is already on the ground. They shouldn’t cross appeal if they are unhappy with any part of the judgment of the lower court which you are also appealing against in this court?
Barrister Rev. Jesse-Daniels Onuigbo Esq (CCNL)
My lord, what we are saying is that Mobil oil ought to have brought this motion on notice (cross appeal) before now. Mobil Oil ought to have filed this application. Mobil Oil filed this application twenty-seven (27) months after the judgment of the lower court delivered on 8th of December, 2009. My lord …………..!!!!!..........!!!!!!!.........!!!!!!!!!?
Court (Justice Mahmud Mohammed)
Alright………….Alright…………Alright. Can Mobil Oil be granted an extension of time to file a cross appeal? If Mobil Oil has any complaint against the judgment of the lower court; the same judgment which yourself is not happy about, so what prevent Mobil Oil from coming here to say whatever they have to say against the judgment of the lower court?
Barrister Rev. Jesse-Daniels Onuigbo Esq (CCNL)
No objection my lord.
Court (Justice Mahmud Mohammed)
Thank you. Hope you are not asking for cost?
Barrister Rev. Jesse-Daniels Onuigbo Esq (CCNL)
I am not asking for cost, my lord. We shall reciprocate the gesture of the other party. My lord.
Court (Justice Mahmud Mohammed)

PAGE 6 OF 11
Court Ruling
The application for an enlargement of time for leave of this court to cross appeal against the judgment of the Court Of Appeal Calabar Judicial Division delivered on 8th of December, 2009 which was not opposed is hereby granted.
The cross appeal already filed in this court on 11th of April, 2012 is deemed properly filed and served today - 8th of April, 2013.
The application by the respondent/cross appellant for the extension of time to file respondent/cross appellant brief of argument is deemed properly filed and served. The respondent/cross appellant brief of argument already filed on 11th of April, 2012 is deemed properly filed today – 8th of April, 2013. No order of cost.

PAGE 7 OF 11
The Interpretation Of Rulings Of Justice Mahmud Mohammed On Cross Appeal Filed By Mobil Producing Nigeria Unlimited
Interpretation of legal terms.
In realization of the fact that Mobil Producing Nigeria Unlimited absolutely failed to file A Substantive Cross Appeal In The Supreme Court Of Nigeria within (3) months as provided for in the Supreme Court Act, Chapter 424, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 1990, Section 27, Subsection (2A); Mike Ozekhome recently Filed An Application For Leave Of Court For Time Extension to File A Substantive Cross Appeal
Please, kindly allow me to quote The Supreme Court Act, Chapter 424, Laws Of The Federation Of Nigeria 1990, Section 27, Subsection (2A);
27. (1) where a person desires to appeal to the Supreme Court he shall give notice of appeal or notice of his application for leave to appeal in such manner as may be directed by Rules of Court within the period prescribed by subsection (2) of this section that is applicable to the case.

(2) The periods prescribed for the giving of notice of appeal or notice of application for leave to appeal are-

(a) in an appeal in a civil case, fourteen days in an appeal against an interlocutory decision and three months in an appeal against a final decision;

As a result of the above statutory provisions, the leading legal counsel of Comandclem Nigeria Limited-Barrister Rev. Jesse-Daniels Onuigbo Esq filed a Counter-Affidavit Requesting The Honourable Justices Of The Supreme Court Of Nigeria To Dismiss And Refuse The Cross Appeal Filed By Dr. Eyimofe Atake For Being Filed Out Of Time Recognized By Law. To ensure that the A Substantive Cross Appeal succeeds before the Honourable Justices of the Supreme Court of Nigeria, Mike Ozekhome filed An Application For Time Enlargement To File A Cross Appeal as provided for under section 31 of the Supreme Court Act, Chapter 424, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 1990.

Please, kindly allow me to quote Section 31, Subsection (1) of the Supreme Court Act, Chapter 424, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 1990.
31. (1) The Court may enlarge the time provided by these Rules for the doing of anything to which these Rules apply, or may direct a departure from these Rules in any other way when this is required in the interest of justice.

On 8th of April, 2013, the Leading Legal Counsel of Comandclem Nigeria Limited - Barrister Rev. Jesse-Daniels Onuigbo Esq had no option than to allow the Application For Leave Of Court For Time Extension to File A Substantive Cross Appeal to succeed in a situation where such a request was made by the Court (Justice Mahmud Mohammed).
Court (Justice Mahmud Mohammed)
Alright………….Alright…………Alright. Can Mobil Oil be granted an extension of time to file a cross appeal? If Mobil Oil has any complaint against the judgment of the lower court; the same judgment which yourself is not happy about, so what prevent Mobil Oil from coming here to say whatever they have to say against the judgment of the lower court?
Owing to the fact that the Application For Leave Of Court For Time Extension to File A Substantive Cross Appeal was granted by the by Court (Justice Mahmud Mohammed), the Substantive Cross Appeal filed by Mobil Oil was also granted despite it was filed twenty-seven (27) months as against three (3) months recognized by the law.

PAGE 8 OF 11
The Impacts Of The Rulings Of Court (Justice Mahmud Mohammed) On Suit Sc./69/2011
It is pertinent to critically examine in detailed the possibilities of both positive and negative impacts of the rulings of Court (Justice Mahmud Mohammed) On Suit Sc./69/2011. Our abilities to carry out judicial surgical operations on the pronouncements of Court (Justice Mahmud Mohammed) On Suit Sc./69/2011 on 8th of April, 2013 with respect to the regularizations of all the motions on notice will go a long way to forecast the possible outcomes of a (13) thirteen- year-old-case between Comandclem Nigeria Lomited and Mobil Producing Nigeria Unlimited.
In Our next publication, the entire team of Anti-Corrosive-Vanguards shall review the pronouncements of Court (Justice Mahmud Mohammed) On Suit Sc./69/2011 on 8th of April, 2013. Happy reading in advance.

PAGE 9 OF 11
Personal Opinions Of Anti-Corrosive Vanguards On The Rulings Of Court (Justice Mahmud Mohammed)

The entire members of Anti-Corrosive Vanguards enjoy the constitutional rights of freedom of speech on issues pertaining to the Patent Right RP 13522 Of King Professor CJA Uwemedimoh. Our personal opinions shall be reserved until all the processes are filed in the Supreme Court of Nigeria by the legal counsels of Comandclem Nigeria Limited and Mobil Producing Nigeria Unlimited.

PAGE 10 OF 11
Date Of Next Hearing
The Suit No SC./69/2011
Going by the rulings of the Court (Justice Mahmud Mohammed) on 8th of April, 2013, it was obvious that the court deemed the Amended Brief Of Argument filed by Comandclem Nigeria Limited dully filed and served, and also deemed the Substantive Cross Appeal filed by Mobil Producing Nigeria Unlimited dully filed and served. The legal implication of this is that the Court expects the legal counsel of Comandclem Nigeria Limited to file a reply (Respondent’s Reply On Cross Appeal) to the Substantive Cross Appeal of Mobil Producing Nigeria Unlimited. In the same vein, the court also expects the legal counsel of Mobil Producing Nigeria Unlimited to file a reply (Respondent’s Reply on Amended Brief of Argument) to the Amended Brief Of Argument Of Comandclem Nigeria Limited. Those two correspondences are expected to be dully filed and served with (8) eight weeks as provided for in the Supreme Court Rule of 1985 (As Amended), Order 6, Rule 5, Section 2.
“The respondent shall file in the Court and serve on the appellant his own Brief within eight weeks after service on him of the Brief of the appellant. “

PAGE 11 OF 11
Conclusion
The legal implications of granting both the Amended Brief of Argument filed by Comandclem Nigeria Limited, and the Substantive Cross Appeal filed by Mobil Producing Nigeria Unlimited in the Supreme Court of Nigeria exhibited ostensibly that Honourable Justice Mahmud Mohammed was only keenly interested in the critical review or re-litigation of the entire judicial pronouncements of the first appellant court before Honourable Justice Kumai Bayang Akaahs majorly on the contested issues set-aside for determination between the litigants.
The contested issues between the litigants (CCNL and Mobil Oil) are un-reconcilable differences calling for an immediate adjudication before the Honorable Justices of the Supreme Court of Nigeria. From the perspective of Mobil Oil, this Oil Giant was not happy with the two pronouncements of the Federal Court of Appeal, Calabar Judicial Division before Honourable Justice Kumai Bayang Akaahs who ruled categorically that Anti-Corrosive Special Paint for QIT with patent number RP 13522 was invented by King Professor CJA Uwemedimoh, and the oral agreement to pay the sum of $2:00 (Dollar) per barrel was not against public policy (Petroleum Act).
Conversely, Comandclem Nigeria Limited was not comfortable with the two pronouncements of the Federal Court of Appeal, Calabar Judicial Division before Honourable Justice Kumai Bayang Akaahs who ruled that paragraph 29 (iii), (iv), (v), and (viii) of the Amended Statement of claim were statute barred, and Comandclem Nigeria Limited failed to show evidence that the infringement of the Latter Patent RP 13522 was continuous after 5th of August, 1999 when the Patent Certificate was issued by the Federal Government Of Nigeria to King Professor CJA Uwemedimoh.


It is the contention of Anti-Corrosive Vanguard that paragraph 29 (iii), (iv), (v), and (viii) of the Amended Statement of claim were not statute barred because of the fact that they constitute rem judicata , and the issue of continuous infringement on the Patent Right RP 13522 after 5th of August, 1999 by Mobil Oil has never been an issue in dispute either at interlocutory stage or the recent substantive stage of the legal battle.
NAME: YUSUF NURUDEEN (AAT, ACA)
POSITION: CCNL NATIONAL MARKETING MANAGER
OFFICE ADDRESS: CCNL ZONAL HEADQUARTERS, NUMBER 4, OGUDU ROAD,
OJOTA, LAGOS STATE.
MOBIL NUMBER: +2347032522248
EMAIL ADDRESS: thepatenteesonlinenewspaper@yahoo.com
TWETTER NAME: CCNL_PATENTEES
FACEBOOK NAME: COMANDCLEM PATENTEES
CCNL CORPORATE FACEBOOK ADDRESS: www.facebook.com/COMANDCLEMNIGERIALIMITED
CCNL CORPORATE WEBSITE: www.comandclemonline.com
CCNL FORUM: www.comandclemonline.com/forum/index.php?

www.comandclem.org/forum/index.php?topic=3.32

Views: 4746

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

HOW MOBIL PRODUCING NIGERIA UNLIMITED BOUGHT MERCENARY JUDGE GLADYS K. OLOTU WITH AMERICA DOLLARS IN AN ATTEMPT TO REPRIEVE CCNL LETTER PATENT 13522 IN THE FEDERAL HIGH COURT UYO, NIGERIA
SUIT NO: FHC/UY/CS/47/2003



Introduction

It is a truism to affirm that taking all the robes of all the good judges that have ever lived on the face of the earth, and they would not be large enough to cover the iniquity of one corrupt judge. Public trust and confidence in the judiciary systems of any country are crucial to an aggrieved party in the society. The matter of justice and its administration is very fundamental in a civilized society like Nigeria. Public trust in the judiciary placed judicial officers who are responsible for the exercise of judicial powers to do justice in justifiable dispute placed before them.

The foremost duties of judges are to interpret and declare the law in the resolution of justifiable disputes submitted to them for hearing and determination whether it be between individuals or corporate entities.

Also the trail judges appearance, demeanor, and statements should reflect the dignity of the judicial office and enhance public confidence in the administration of justices in Nigeria. It is expected that the trail should give each case individual treatment and judge’s decisions should be based on the particular facts of that case.
The duties of judicial adherence to precedent as well as obedience to statute are indeed cornerstones of the constitutionality and validity of the entire judicial process. In one word, non-adherence to precedent impugns public confidence in the administration of justice in Nigeria. Without any controversy, the credibility and utility of the judiciary where failure to follow the pattern of judicial precedents exist will amount to exchange of public trust with monetary inducements or extraneous influence.

This is what transpired in the case of patent right infringement litigation between Comandclem Nigeria limited and Mobil producing Nigerian unlimited where a mercenary judge Gladys K. Olotu failed in totality to abide by the doctrine of precedent, judicial impartiality, abuse of judicial discretion and most importantly avoidance of conflict of interest in the determination of the case reflected an extreme case of injudicious conducts being also a violation of oath of office to do justice without fear or favor and not to allow personal interest to influence official conduct or decision. Wonder shall never end in Nigeria judicial system.

I am yet to read, hear or even to see an unbelievable situation whereby a judge of the federal high court in Nigeria will turn herself to an advocator /council of a party (MPNU) in a dispute over patent right infringement litigation and admit allegations against a party (MPNU) which were denied by the same party (MPNU) only to give judgment against the party that alleges (CCNL). When foreign currencies especially America dollars find its way into the court rooms and eventually penetrates into the pockets of a judge, what do you expect rather than legal somersault and judicial abracadabra in the judgment of the judge involved. In one word, mercenary judge Gladys K Olotu in hungry of American Dollars



A CONCISE ANALYSIS OF THE PLEADINGS IN THE CASE AS CLAIMED BY THE PARTIES
HEAR AND CLAIMS OF PROFESSOR CJA UWEMEDIMO AND COMANDCLEM NIGERIA UNLIMITED


“I remember 1980, that was when
I invented the anti-corrosive chemical for Mobil to use. Mr Peter Uwa informed me that Mobil had a problem that the salt water did not allow them to operate as it was corroding all the metal pipes and tanks in the producing area and that wood bores and weeds were attacking the woods used in the producing areas and that the salt water was washing away the arable lands and rendering the coast land useless, mosquitoes and another kinds of pets were smacking the place unbearable for the workers. That the helicopters were also corroding and did not have free flights to the off-shore. The problem were so many. They area all in my records. Peter Nwa was a staff of the defendant. After listening to him, I told him that I could use my expertise if I am given an opportunity. So I wrote a letter to the Area Operation Manager of the Defendant on 2nd May 1980 and I promised to visit and interview them on 8th May, 1980. At the interview, they narrated all the problem to me and said that provided they give me an helicopter and some men to work and conduct a research in the Creeks. The person at the interview were Harry Hawkins, Mr Gwalker, Tom Laferty (these were white) then the blacks are Dr Gbirm, Mr Esi, Okonkwo Oji. They promised that if I could solve their problems relating to the corrosion, snakes, and wheelers, coat the helicopter to prevent it from corroding, they promised to give me $ 2 (two dollars) per barrel of all the products produced by Mobil. I quickly arranged for a research using speedboats and helicopters to find the cause of all the problems narrated to me. I came out with a solution by inventing anti corrosive special paint”


Summary of relevant facts of the claims

i. Professor CJA UWEMEDIMO’S uncle (Mr Peter Nwa) who is a staff of MPNU informed Professor CJA Uwemedimo of Corrosion problem of MPNU
ii. After listening to Mr Peter Nwa, Professor UWEMEDIMO’S said he could use his expertise to solve those problems of corrosion if given opportunities
iii. Professor UWEMEDIMO wrote a letter to the Area Operation Manager of MPNU on the subject matter and promised to visit and interview MPNU
iv. In the Interview where Harry Hawkins,. Mr G. Walker, Tom Lafferty and Dr Gbirm, Mr Esi, OKONKWO Oji were present promised to pay $2 barrel of all the products produced by MPNU if professor UWEMEDIMO could research and invent paint to solve all the corrosion problems orally.
v. Based on this oral agreement, Professor CJA UWEMEDIMO researched and invented anticorrosive special paint the only paint that enable the extraction of crude oil in Nigeria and anywhere in the world
vi. And lot more


HEARING AND CLAIMS OF TWO WITNESS OF MPNU
“Mr Harry F. Hawkins and Mr G.W. Walker
My name if Harry Fredrick Hawkins. My address is 5146 county Road, 125A Wild Wood, Florida. I`m retired. I do not know the 1st and 2nd Plaintiffs “Professor UWEMEDIMO and Comadclem Nigeria Limited. Their names do not mean much to me. I knew Mobil the defendant. I worked for them. I am 84 years old. I have a very bad hearing problem. I just got out of hospital in October because they put a pacemaker in me to control my heart. This was in October. I also have acute arthritis problem in my heart. This was in October. I also have acute arthritis problem in my right leg. I came to Mobil Nigeria sometime in May or June 979. My position was maintenance manager. In 1980 when the plaintiff’s cause of action arose, I was maintenance manager. I know Mr G.W. Walker. He was my boss at Qua Iboe Terminal. I know Dr. A. Agbim. He was the counterpart to Mr G. walker. He was my boss. When Walker was at the terminal and I was there, Walker would go to Lagos and Agim would take his place. The Maintenance manager reported to the operations manager. Dr Agbim and Walker were operations manager. I knew Felix Ese very well. He was my counterparts as maintenance Manager. I do not know Okonkwo Odu. I know Tom Lafferty. He was a contract employee for Mobil Oil Nigeria. Contract employees were people who were employed from England and United State to do part of the raining of Nigerian Employees. I do not remember any meeting with the 1st Plaintiff, Walker, Ese, Okonkwo, Tom Lafferty and Agbim where an oral contract was reached to the effect that the defendant would pay the 1st plaintiff $ 2a per barrel of every petroleum product produced by Mobil. And lot more.
My name is G.W. Walker. The G.W are from my father’s names. My father was George Washington Walker but I am G. W. Walker. I live at 5900 Rexroth Avenue, Bakersfield, California. I am 83 years old. I am retired. I play golf. I take medication for gout, high blood pressure, high cholesterol, rhythmic heart condition. I also have a pacemaker. I also take medication for arthritis. I do not know the plaintiffs. I know the defendant, Mobil Nigeria. I worked for them. I worked for Mobil Nigeria from the middle of 1978 to the end of 1983. I know Harry Hawkins. He worked for us at the Terminal at Qua Iboe. He was maintenance superintendent. I knew Dr Agbim. He was my relief. When I was in Lagos, he was in the terminal. When I was in the terminal her was in Lagos. Iknown Mr Felix Ese. He was an Engineer that worked primarily in maintenance at Qua Ibo. I do not known Mr Okonkwo Oju and lot more”


SUMMARY OF RELEVANT FACTS OF THE CLAIMS
i. Mr Harry Fredrick Hawkins don’t know Professor CJA Uwamedimo and Comandclem Nigeria Limited.
ii. Mr Harry Fredrick Hawkins knew Mr G.W. Walker, Dr Agbim , Felix Ese , Okonkwo Odu , Tom Lafferty etc .
iii. Mr Harry Fredrick Hawkins denied holding any meeting with Professor CJA Uwemedimo and others where oral contract was reached to pay $2 par all the products produced by MPNU on the request to research and invent anti corrosive special paint
iv. G.W. Walker don’t know Professor CJA Uwemedimo and Comandelem Nigeria limited
v. G.W Walker know Harry F. Hawkins, Dr Agbim, Mr Felix Ese etc
vi. G.W Walker Denied holding any meeting with professor Umemedimoh and others where oral contract was reached to pay $2 per all the products of produced by MPNU on the request to research and invent anti corrosive special paint.



DISPLAY OF INCONSISTENCIES IN THE CLAIMS OF THOSE OF TWO WITNESS OF MPNU AND COUNSELS OF MPNU
The counsel to MPNU held contrary claims to those of two witness of MPNU as follows;
(1) Professor Uwemedimo is a paid employee of MPNU
(2) The invention of anti corrosive special paint is made by Professor Uwemedimo in the course of the said employment..
(3) The invention of anti-corrosive special paint is made by Professor Uwemedimo in the execution of a co tract for a performance of specified work.
(4) Conclusively, going by section 2 (4) of patent and Design act the invention of anti corrosive special paint belongs to MPNU who commissioned the said invention
(5)
Burning Questions that Need answers
The following questions are directed to mercenary Judge Gladys K Olotu
1. How could Professor Uwemedimo who was not known to Mr Harry F. Hawkins and Mr G.W. Walker be a paid employee of MPNU? Wonder shall never end!
2. Where is the letter of appointment of such an engagement? Please, can somebody help me out!
3. How much salary MPNU paid to Professor employed professor Uwemedimo? I want to know
4. What was the cadre of employment they employed professor Uwememodimo. I need explanation.
5. What are the terms of the said contract? This is very important to be declosed
6. Which specified work was agreed upon between professor Uwemedimo and MPNU?
7. Where was such an agreement to execute a contract to perform a specified work reached? Miracles shall continue to occur in Nigeria court room



LEGAL SOMERSAULT AND JUDICIAL ABRACADABRA
IN THE JUDGMENT OF MERCENARY GLADYS K. OLOTU ON 28TH OF NOVEMBER, 2008 POINTING TO HOW AMERICA DOLLARS PENETRATED INTO THE COURT-ROOMS AND POCKET OF JUDGE.


As I said earlier, I am yet to read, hear even seen an unbelievable situation whereby a judge of the federal High Court in Nigeria will turn herself to an advocator or counsel of party (MPNU ) in a dispute over patent right infringement litigation and admit allegations against a party (MPNU) which were denied by the same party (MPANU) only to give judgment against the party that alleges (CCNL). Wonder shall continue in Nigerian court rooms.
Both Mr Harry Fredick Hawkin and Mr G.W. walker claimed they don’t know professor Uwemedimo who researched and invented anti-corrosive special paint. Here is the judicial firm-trick from mercenary Judge Gladys K Olotu of the federal High Court. In her judgment which is shown below

“In concluding my determination of these issues, I hold that the Plaintiffs are not entitled to the letters patent is respect of their alleged invention to remedies/royalty” or compensation for the infringement of same in view of the second limb of section 2(4) of the patent and design Act”


Interpretation of the Judgment of Mercenary Judge Gladys k. Olotu
Section 2(4) of patents and Design Act
“When an invention s made in
- (first limb) the course of employment or
- (second limb) in the execution of a contract for the performance of specific work, the right to a patent in the invention is vested in the employer or, as the case may be, in the person who commissioned the work”
Judges Gladys K Olotu ruled as follows
1. A contract was given to Professor Uwemedimo,
Note: This was denied by Mr Harry F. Hawkins and Mr G.W. Walker. You can’t give a contract to somebody you don’t know
2. The nature of the contract was to perform a specific work – (reached and invention of anti- corrosive special paint
Note: This was also denied by Mr Harry F. Hawkins and Mr G.W. Walker
3. Professor Uwemedimo is an employee of MPNU who invented anti- corrosive special paint in the course of his employment which was commissioned by MPNU
Note: The letter of appointment or engagement as an employee of MPNU was not shown to us.
4. As a result of the above, MPNU invented anti- corrosive special paint
Note: Where is the certificate of invention issued by the Federal Government of Nigeria appropriate agency and world intellectual property organizations? Please help me out, I need a cup of water.

This is a clear case of legal somersault and judicial abracadabra. I cannot stop laughing fellow patentees Mercenary judge Gladys K Olotu admitted allegations which were denied by MPNU only to give judgment against professor Uwemedimo and CCNL. Without any controversy, American dollar has found its ways into the court room and eventually resides in the pocket of the mercenary Judge Gladys Olotu. This explains why we have judicial firm ticks in our court rooms in Nigeria.
If judge like mercenary judge Gladys K. Olotu ignores the law and decides only as per her own notions of justice and propriety, litigation becomes a gamble and casinos and not cathedrals rings true. Advocates will be treated as gamblers instead of social engineers. The Indian farmers gamble in the monsoon. The Indian lawyer gambles on the psychology of the judge. The younger generation of advocates will be induced to believe that instead of working hard to know the law, it would be better to known mercenary judges and advocates will turn into glorified brokers.
It is pertinent to categorically sate that my criticism of the judgment delivered by mercenary judge Gladys K. Olotu should not be prohibited by any rational thinking human being because of my constitutional right to free speech remains inviolate in a civilian democratic dispensation. The maradonic judicial pronouncement of mercenary Gladys K Olotu in the case between CCNL and MPNU left much to be desired in terms of critical analyze of the subject maters of the case. I consider the totality of the judgment as nothing rather than judicial abortion of a nine-month –old pregnancy by a maradonic Judge Gladys K Olotu of the Federal High Court of Nigeria Uyo. Without any controversy, American dollars have penetrated in to the courtroom and eventually got into the pocket of the judge. Miracles shall continue to flow in Nigerian curt rooms.


NAME: YUSUF NURUDEEN (AAT, ACA)

POSITION: CCNL NATIONAL MARKETING MANAGER

OFFICE ADDRESS:
CCNL ZONAL HEADQUARTERS,
NUMBER 4, OGUDU ROAD,
OJOTA,
LAGOS STATE.

CCNL CORPORATE WEBSITE: www.comandclemonline.com

CCNLFORUM: www.comandclemonline.com/forum/index.php

MOBIL NUMBER: +2347032522248

FACEBOOK NAME: COMANDCLEM PATENTEES

TWETTER NAME: CCNL_PATENTEES

CCNL CORPORATE FACEBOOK ADDRESS: www.facebook.com/COMANDCLEMNIGERIALIMITED

EMAIL ADDRESS: thepatenteesonlinenewspaper@yahoo.com

Comandclem Nigeria Limited

Computerization Of Patentees` Database

Through

A Multi-Purpose Identity Card

In realization of an unexpected increase in the number of Patent-Right Holders in the intellectual property of King Professor CJA Uwemedimoh Called Anti-Corrosive Special Paint For QIT QAD with Patent Number RP:13522, the Management after due consultations with some information technology professionals resolved to Computerize The Patentees` Database through Multi-Purpose Identity Cards which is in line with best International Corporate Practice.

The inevitable needs to recognize Patent-Right Holders with Multi-Purpose Identity Cards will not only eliminate the era of office paper work but also create Data Reliability, Data Integrity And Most Importantly, Data Security.

This Multi-Propose Id Card allows both physical and digital recognition of Patent Right Investors through embedded integrated circuit chips capable of processing patentees` information with the aid of chips enabled terminals.

 

FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS

 

(1)         What Is A Multi-Purpose I.D. Card?

 

 

A Multi-Purpose I.D. Card is an embedded integrated circuit chips I. D. Card capable of electronically storing and processing patentees` sensitive information with the aid of sophisticated chips enabled information technology devices. It boosts patentees` confidence and trust in a social security scheme, and most importantly, it makes administrative work easy for the Management because it eliminates herculean office papers` work, and creates Data Accuracy, Data Security And Data Reliability Among Others.

 

 

 

(2)        Who Is Eligible To Apply For A Multi-Purpose I. D. Card Form?

 

Only a registered member of Comandclem Nigeria Limited either as A Patentee or A Committee of Friend is eligible to apply for a Multi-Purpose I. D. Card Form.

 

 

 

 

(3)         Why Should Patentees Apply For Multi-Purpose I. D. Cards Form While The Case Is Still Ongoing In The Supreme Court Of Nigeria?

 

Comandclem Nigeria Limited is a proactive company driven by highly focused Management Team geared toward the actualization of the entire aims and objectives of the company within the shortest time possible.  The Focused Management Team must not wait till the end of the case before embarking on the computerization of the entire Patentees` Database.   In actual fact, the computerization of the CCNL Patentees` Database is overdue. Also, your company needs money to pursue the ongoing litigation in the Supreme Court of Nigeria.

 

 

(4)        What Does It Take To Get A Multi-Purpose I. D. Card Form?

 

The cost of A Multi-Purpose I. D. Card form is free while

-The cost of Multi-Purpose I. D. Card is =N=2,000:00 &

 -A passport.

 

 

 

 

 

(5)        What Is The Method Of Payment?

 

                Payment can be made through

-      Registration & Information Offices of Comandclem Nigeria  

               Limited in your State.

                Or

         -   Bank Name    : Access Bank Nigeria PLC

          Account Name: Comandclem Nigeria Limited

          Account Number: 0042926342

         

 

 

(6)        What Are The Pre-Requisites To Apply For A Multi-Purpose I. D. Card Form?

 

 

-      An official receipt of registration or a bank teller

-      CCNL completed registration form

 

 

 

 

(7)        I Have Relocated To A New State Different From My State Of Registration. Can I Obtain The Multi-Purpose I. D. Card Form In My New State?

 

 

Yes. You can obtain your Multi-Purpose I. D. Card Form in your New State different from your State Of Registration. You must ensure that

(1) You write your State Of Registration in the Multi-Purpose I. D. Card Form.

(2) You collect your Multi-Purpose I. D. Card in the New State.

Note: Comandclem Nigeria Limited will ensure that your sensitive data are captured on our database among patentees in your state of registration. You Multi-Purpose I. D. Card will be collected in your New State.

 

 

(8)        What Is The Administrative Implication If I Fail To Apply For A Multi-Purpose I. D. Card Form?

 

 

The administrative implication is that the sensitive data of any patentee that fails to apply for a Multi-Purpose I. D. Card Form will not be captured in the Corporate Data Base that will be made available on the internet in batches any moment from now. The authenticity of registration of such a patentee cannot be confirmed on the internet.

 

 

 

 

(9)        What Is The Closing Date Of Applying For A Multi-Purpose I. D. Card Form?

 

 

The last stage of Patentees` Documents & Physical Verification Exercise is online confirmation of valid registration. The earlier the participation of patentees in the computerization exercise, The Better The Confirmation Of The Validity Of Their Registrations.

 

 

(10)     I Cannot Find My CCNL Completed Registration Form And Official Receipt. Sensitive Data Therein Are Needed To Complete The Multi-Purpose I. D. Card Form. Please, How Can I Participate In The Multi-Purpose I. D. Card Registration Exercise?

 

This is not a problem. Contact the CCNL Manager in your State of Registration for your Multi-Purpose I. D. Card Form. CCNL Manager in your State of Registration will surely be of help to you in this regard.

 

 

 

For further enquiries, visit,

Comandclem Nigeria Limited,

No. 4, Ogudu Road,

Ojota,

Lagos State.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(anitaboldeng4love@yahoo.in)
Hi my dear,i love your profile,
i am Miss Anita please contact me
here at my private email(anitaboldeng4love@yahoo.in)
I have an important reason of contacting you and
i hope we can share great experiences beyond here
i will send you my picture and more details Thanks.
yours truly Anita.

 

 

CONTENT                                                                                       PAGES

(1) Introdcution…………………………………………………………………………………          1 - 3

(2) Why You Claimed Our Investment With

 Comandclem Nigeria Limited Is Saved?............................................      4 - 6

(3) Judicial Surgical Operation On The Verdict Delivered

 By Honourable Justice Kumai Bayang Akaahs …….…………….………         7 - 9

 (4) The Interpretation Of The Verdict Delivered

 By Honourable Justice Kumai Bayang Akaahs

On Statute Barred ……………………………………………………….………………….         10 - 12

(5) Reasons Why Your Investment In Comandclem

Nigeria Limited Is Saved And Secured…………………………………….               13

 (6) Reasons Why CCNL Patentees  Should Not

Express Any Fear And Invest More……………………….…………………..              14

(7) The Principles Of Pleadings

Interpretation Of The Judgment………………………………..……………….         15 -16

(8) Evidence Of Continuous Infringement

On The Patent Right RP: 13522 By………………………………………………           17- 20

 (9) How Honourable Justice Kumai Bayang

Akaahs Erred In Law……………………………………………..…………………………          21 - 23

(10) Conclusion ……………………………………………………….………………………….          24 -27

  

 

 

 

 

 

                                  

Introduction

Why are you telling us stories?

 

                         Mr. Shamsideen Aremu, I am very happy to meet you Sir. I consider it paramount to clarify certain issues before you today. For your information, I am not a story-teller but An Illustrious National Marketing Manager of Comandclem Nigeria Limited from Number 4, Ogudu Road, Ojota, Lagos State. I report the legitimate activities and objectives of Comandclem Nigeria Limited with the aid of international network called internet. When The Libration News Paper failed to publish for some logistic reasons, I single handedly publish The Patentees` Online News Papers, & The Inventor’s Magazine. I have a lot of those publications to my credit. I work for free without any salary. Get this fact clear today if you are not aware before. I came out to help CCNL Patentees updated on facts and figures about their investments.

 I don’t deserve any form of insult. Ok?

 

 

                  Mr. Shamsideen Aremu for your information, I report the transformation of Nigerians most especially the CCNL Patentees from poverty to affluence, from joblessness to gainful employment, from worst health conditions to improved heath situation, from worst road network to improved road network system. I report facts and figures backed-up with verifiable documentary evidences. Hello, get it clear. This is a serious issue, not a joking matter. I stand out among hundreds of thousands on the internet. There was an occasion I personally spent over =N=9,500:00 to scan CCNL litigation documents on the internet in my genuine missions to expose the criminal acts committed by Mobil oil in Nigerian economy, and to regularly inform CCNL Patentees on the level of their investments in Comandclem Nigeria Limited . I repeat without any reservation to anybody, I don’t deserve any form of insult from anybody, including you. Ok?

 

            In as much as I have been able to clarify this misrepresentation of my personality and mission statements, let me attend to your questions. Each time you ask me questions on face book – www.facebook.com/ComandclemNigeriaLimited, I always refer you to CCNL forums www.comandclemonline.com/forum & www.comandclem.org/forum. The reasons are that, I want a wider participation of viewers, and centralization of pools of information. Several cyber attacks by agents of Mobil Oil on those forums accounted for little challenges in terms of unsuccessful registration of patentees in the forums. We shall soon get over those cyber attacks challenges. With God, everything is possible.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Why You Claimed Our Investment With

 Comandclem Nigeria Limited

Is Saved And You Are Not Taking Massive Action Against

 Mobil Producing Nigeria Unlimited

 In Order To Get The Royalties Fast From Them?

 

 

             Mr. Shamsideen Aremu kindly allows me to sub-divide the above questions into two questions to enable me to crush them to powder - according to Justice Gladys K. Olotu of the Federal High Court, Uyo.

 

Question (1A)

Why you claimed our investment with Comandclem Nigeria Limited is saved?

Question (1B)

Why can’t Comandclem Nigeria Limited take massive actions against Mobil Producing Nigeria Limited in order to get the royalties fast from them?

 

Respond To Question (1A)

 

            When I read through this question, I was very happy in the sense that the question gives me wide ranges of opportunities to demonstrate before you the cogent reasons why you should invest more and upgrade your investment in CCNL from a Patentee to a Noble, even a Knight, if possible. My vast Accountancy and Legal knowledge in the financial world most especially patent-rights investments exhibited ostensibly that no investor complains of financial crises when invested in company dealing in perfectly inelastic commodities. Your investment in patent-right is not only saved but also risk-free. In this type of investment, your money works for you. Yes! I mean it.

                   To show that your investment in CCNL is saved and secured, I need to employ some financial and legal terms to demonstrate my arguments before you. For the purpose of this write-up, I will limit my financial and legal terms to the investment sayings of Warren Buffett, and The Principles Of Pleadings & Doctrine Of Stare Decises with respect to the litigation between Comandclem Nigeria Limited and Mobil Producing Nigeria Unlimited in the Supreme Court of Nigeria -SC./69/2011. Mr. Shamsideen Aremu, I sense that you are afraid of the possible outcomes of the pending litigation between Comandclem Nigeria Limited and Mobil oil in the Supreme Court of Nigeria. It is axiomatic to affirm that – risk comes only from not knowing what you are doing. In Comandclem Nigeria Limited, we (The Management Team headed by King Professor CJA Uwemedimoh) knew what we have been doing in the past, what we are doing now, and what we shall do in the future. As a result of those, we bear no risk in all our dealings. Yes, I mean it. No shaking. With God, everything is not only possible but also achievable.

                          

            I will not fail to make references to the Judgment delivered by Honourable Justice Kumai Bayang Akaahs in an honest bid to clarify hidden issues unknown to majorities of CCNL Patentees. In carrying out a judicial surgical operation on the verdicts delivered by Honourable Justice Kumai Bayang Akaahs, I will show clearly parts of his rulings in favour of CCNL, and the other parts unfavourable to CCNL - now being contested in the Supreme Court of Nigeria. At the end of the day, I will demonstrate before you justifiable reasons why Mobil Oil will fail in the Supreme Court of Nigeria. Yes, I mean it. CCNL will get the royalty because of the fact that parties are bound by their pleadings. You cannot eat your cake and have it back. In law, it is called The Principles Of Approbation & Reprobation.

 

 

Judicial Surgical Operation

 On The Verdict Delivered By

Honourable Justice Kumai Bayang Akaahs

 

(A) Part Of The Rulings Favourable To CCNL

 

(1)         The Ownership Of The Patent Right RP: 13522.-Now Being Contested By Mobil Oil In Their Cross Appeal Filed In The Supreme Court Of Nigeria

Honourable Justice Kumai Bayang Akaahs said and I quote

 

                   I wish to say straightaway that having applied for the patent and the patent certificate No. RP:13522 was issued (Ex. 2) Comandclem Nigeria Limited became the registered Patentee in the invention called Anti-Corrosive Special paint for QIT (Tran steel Blue, White Enamel Q.A.D.) with effect from 5/8/99.

 

(2) The Case of CCNL Is Not Contrary To Public Policy. - Now Being Contested By Mobil Oil In Their Cross Appeal Filed In The Supreme Court Of Nigeria.

Honourable Justice Kumai Bayang Akaahs said and I quote

 

                    I do not agree with the trial judge that an agreement to pay $2:00 per barrel of every petroleum product to plaintiffs would necessarily be against public policy.

 

 

(B) Parts Of The Rulings Unfavourable To CCNL- now being contested in The Supreme Court of Nigeria by CCNL

 

(1)        The Case of CCNL Is Statute Barred Including Paragraph 29 (iii), (iv), (v) and (viii)

 

Honourable Justice Kumai Bayang Akaahs said and I quote

 

                       -As at the time the Court of Appeal (Justice Chukwuma-Eneh) ruled that the claims in paragraph 29 (iii), (iv), (v) and (viii) of the Amended Statement of Claim were not affected by the limitation law, there was no consideration of the evidence to be adduced.

                        -As it turned out the purported infringement occurred in the early 1980s and since the action was commenced in 2000, it is statute barred even if they had proved their case as there is no evidence that the infringement has continued after the Patent for the invention was registered.

 

 

 

The Interpretation Of The Verdict Delivered By

Honourable Justice Kumai Bayang Akaahs

On Statute Barred

 

(1) As at the time Mobil Producing Nigeria Unlimited was said to have infringed the invention of CCNL in 1980s, the said invention was not registered.

(2) The said invention belongs to nobody statutorily between 1980s and 4th of August, 1999 because it was not registered by CCNL during those periods. – Period Of Legal Disability

(3) Comandclem Nigeria Limited became the statutory inventor on 5th of August, 1999 when the invention was registered. – Period Of Legal Ability

(4) After the registration of this invention by CCNL on 5th of August, 1999, Court of Appeal claimed that CCNL failed to show evidence of continuous infringement of the invention by Mobil Oil. – Argument On Continuous Infringement.

(5) Court claimed that Mobil Oil infringed on the said invention in 1980s when it was not registered but a legal action was taken against Mobil Oil in the year 2000 by CCNL, as a result of this 19 years legal disability, the case of CCNL is statute barred.- Argument On Limitation Of Action.

(6) Because of the fact that the case of CCNL is statute barred- (commenced after 19 years as against 5 years according to Akwa-Ibom State Laws) royalty, compensations and damages should not be paid. – Argument On Statute Barred.

(7) As at the time Justice Chukwuma-Eneh ruled that the claims in paragraph 29 (iii), (iv), (v) and (viii) of the Amended Statement of Claim were not statute barred, there was no consideration of the evidence to be adduced.- Doctrine Of Stare Decises,

 

                 Mr. Shamsideen Aremu, please at this juncture, I need your maximum attentions with respect to the issues analyzed above. I can sense some signs of fears and tensions. This is because most of the legal terms demonstrated above may not be appreciated in reference to the legal battle between Comandclem Nigeria Limited and Mobil Producing Nigeria Unlimited in the Supreme Court of Nigeria – SC./69/2011. Members of Anti-Corrosive Vanguard are not intimidated by the judicial pronouncements stated above because of the fact that- We Have Invested In An Idea That Can Be Illustrated With A Crayon. Let me illustrate with a crayon reasons why you should invest more & more, even upgrade your investments in Comandclem Nigeria Limited.

 

Reasons Why Your Investment In

 Comandclem Nigeria Limited

 Is Saved And Secured

 

The Purpose Of An Appeal In The Supreme Court

                        I need to re-emphasize that the Management of Comandclem Nigeria Limited headed by King Professor CJA Uwemedimoh has appealed the above verdict delivered by Honourable Justice Kumai Bayang Akaahs in the Supreme Court of Nigeria with suit number SC/69/2011. CCNL filed an appeal in the Supreme Court of Nigeria to correct some fundamental errors in the verdicts of Honourable Justice Kumai Bayang Akaahs of the Federal Court Of Appeal Calabar Judicial Division.

                According to Honourable Justice Nwali Sylvester Ngwuta – Justice Supreme Court, He said and I quote.

               "An appeal is a resort to a superior Court to review the decision of an inferior court and find out whether on the facts placed before it, and applying the relevant and applicable law, the inferior court came to a right or wrong decision.

 

 Per: NGWUTA, J.S.C.- Suit No: SC.125/2003

 

 

 

Reasons Why CCNL Patentees

Should Not Express Any Fear

And

Invest More.

 

              According to Warren Buffet, he said and I quote.

 I will tell you how to become rich. Close the doors. Be fearful when others are greedy. Be greedy when others are fearful. At this level of the case, potential or existing CCNL Patentees should be greedy to invest in the intellectual property of Comandclem Nigeria Limited – RP:13522. This is not only because of the facts that Investment In Knowledge Pays The Best Interest but also The Principles Of Pleadings, Doctrine Of Stare Decises, And Principles Of Ratio Decidendi are favourable to Comandclem Nigeria Limited in the suit number SC./69/2011.

                         It is apparent that the above principles of laws may not be appreciated in the sense that most of my readers lack basic legal knowledge in litigations in reference to the legal battle between Comandclem Nigeria Limited and Mobil Producing Nigeria Unlimited in the Supreme Court of Nigeria. As a result of above, I shall explain each of those legal terms in reference to suit number SC./69/2011. At the end of the day, you will agree with me that your investment in Comandclem Nigeria Limited is saved and secured; and you will have reasons to invest more.

 

 

The Principles Of Pleadings

 

Honourable Justice Kumai Bayang Akaahs said and I quote

                        -As it turned out the purported infringement occurred in the early 1980s and since the action was commenced in 2000, it is statute barred even if they had proved their case as there is no evidence that the infringement has continued after the Patent for the invention was registered.

Interpretation of the judgment

                       Honourable Justice Kumai Bayang Akaahs held that Mobil Oil infringed the invention of the CCNL in 1980s, but CCNL should show evidence that after the registration of the invention on 5th of August, 1999, the infringement of the patented invention of King Uwemedimoh RP:13522 was continuous.

                       The Federal Court of Appeal, Calabar Judicial Division before Honourable Justice Kumai Bayang Akaahs held that CCNL should show evidence of continuous infringement on the patented invention RP:13522 after registration before compensation, damages and royalties could be paid.

 

               The above judicial pronouncement exhibited golden opportunities for potential and existing patentees to invest huge amount of capital into the intellectual property of Comandclem Nigeria Limited so as to reap bumper return on investment. Substantial proportion of your income should be tailored toward investment because your expenditure on investment has positive impacts on your level of financial success. According to Charles A. Jaffe, he said and I quote

 

. It is not your salary that makes you rich.

It is your spending habit that makes you rich.

 

           Here is an ample opportunity to turn =N=30,000:00 investment on intellectual property to =N=30,000:00 return on investment on monthly bases. Business opportunity comes but once in a life time. Grab this opportunity now before it is too late.

 

                     What is required from the Management of Comandclem Nigeria Limited before the Honourable Justices of the Supreme Court of Nigeria is evidence of continuous infringement of the patented invention of King Professor Uwemedimoh – RP: 13522 so as to be entitled to compensation, damages and most importantly, royalty. The ability of the CCNL Legal Counsels to demonstrate this evidence of continuous infringement amounts to MEGA-MONEY evaluated in terms of COMPENSATION, DAMAGES AND ROYALTIES. Yes, I mean it.

 

 

Evidence Of Continuous Infringement

On The Patent Right RP: 13522 By

Mobil Producing Nigeria Unlimited

 

 

               On 9th of May, 2007, Mobil Producing Nigeria Unlimited filed an Amended Statement Defense in respond to the Amended Statement of Claim filed by Comandclem Nigeria Limited on 20th of November, 2001.The Management of Mobil Producing Nigeria Unlimited pleaded and admitted as follows

Paragraph 54 (ii)

               At the date of filling of the patent application by the 1st plaintiff (King Professor CJA Uwemedimoh) in respect of the alleged paints/chemicals (Anti-Corrosive Special Paint), the defendants (Mobil Producing Nigeria Unlimited) were already conducting an undertaking in Nigeria with respect to the efficacy of the paints that will suit the defendants` oil pipelines, and as a result of the said undertaking, they were already manufacturing the paints (Anti-Corrosive Special Paint) and/ or applying for the process for the manufacture of the paints. Therefore the defendants (Mobil Producing Nigeria Unlimited) are entitled to continue to apply and use those paints/chemicals (Anti-Corrosive Special Paint) in law.

 

                The above expressly pleaded and admitted act of continuous infringement of the patented invention of CCNL – PR: 13522 after the registration are evidences required to be exhibited before the Honourable Justices of the Supreme Court of Nigeria so as to be entitled to damages, compensation and royalties.  As a result of the above undisputable and inerasable act of illegality confidently perpetrated by Mobil Producing Nigeria Unlimited, no existing or potential CCNL patentees should have any course to express fear over their investments because of the fact that both the court and parties are bound by their pleadings.

 

            The case between Comandclem Nigeria Limited and Mobil Producing Nigeria Unlimited in the Supreme Court of Nigeria only requires the Legal Counsels of CCNL to exhibit Paragraph 54 (ii) of Amended Statement Defense to the Honourable Justices of the Supreme Court of Nigeria in reference to pleaded and admitted claims of continuous infringement on the patented invention of King CJA Uwemedimoh so as to get royalty, damages and compensations.  This admitted claim is enough to sustain CCNL victory in the Supreme Court of Nigeria as demonstrated by Honourable Justice Niki TobiJ.S.C in the Suit No: SC.384/2001. See below.

 

 

 

In The Supreme Court of Nigeria

On Friday, the 30th day of June, 2006

Suit No: SC.384/2001

 

BONIFACE ANYIKA &

 COMPANY LAGOS NIGERIA LIMITED

 VERSUS

KATSINA U. D. UZOR

 

                    “Pleadings are averments by the party which he claims to be the facts of the case. As far as the party is concerned, the facts pleaded have the content and the strength to give him judgment in the case. In the case of the plaintiff, the pleadings without more, can only give him judgment where the defendant admits the claim or relief.”

Per: Jutice Niki TobiJ.S.C. (P.12, Paras. A-B)

 

 

                       Base on the above authority, it is manifestly cleared that the Management of Mobil Producing Nigeria Unlimited headed by Mark R. Ward must be bound by their pleadings in the sense that they have admitted the claims of CCNL. In law, whatever has been expressly admitted in the pleadings requires no further proof. Any admission made in pleadings binds a party making the admission and therefore the facts need no further proof.”

 Per: Sowemimo, JSC. (Oke-Bola v. Molake (1975) 12 SC 61 at 62)  

 

 

            Mobil Oil is only buying time, they must pay CCNL royalty. With this and other weapons of laws yet to be illustrated, CCNL Patentees should have course to celebrate in advance.

 

 

 

How

 Honourable Justice

Kumai Bayang Akaahs

 Erred In Law

                At this juncture, it is sensible to exhibit how Honourable Justice Kumai Bayang Akaahs misunderstood the case- (No. CA/C/15/2009) before him by defending Mobil Oil on allegations Mobil Oil conspicuously pleaded and admitted in their Statement Of Defense. At no time, right from the inception of the case, the Management of Mobil Producing Nigeria Unlimited headed by Mark R. Ward categorically denied the continuous infringement on the patented invention of CCNL after registration of the invention on 5th of August, 1999. Mobil Oil confidently pleaded and admitted that they were already manufacturing, and even entailed to continue to apply and use in law the patented invention of CCNL after registration on 5th of August, 1999 - Paragraph 54 (ii) of Amended Statement Defense dated on 9th of May, 2007.

 

 

      The questions are

(1) Does Honourable Justice Kumai Bayang Akaahs has jurisdiction to defend Mobil Oil on allegation expressly pleaded and admitted by Mobil Oil?

(2) Why Honourable Justice Kumai Bayang Akaahs was not bound by the pleadings (Paragraph 54 (ii)) of Mobil Oil on continuous infringement on the intellectual property of CCNL?

(3) Why Honourable Justice Kumai Bayang Akaahs raised issues not in dispute between CCNL and Mobil Oil only to deny the first black inventor the legitimate royalty, compensation and damages?

 (4) Why Honourable Justice Kumai Bayang Akaahs raised issued not before the court only to deny the first black inventor the legitimate royalty, compensation and damages?

 (5) Why Honourable Justice Kumai Bayang Akaahs went outside the pleadings of the parties, and records of the courts in search of evidence only to deny the first black inventor the legitimate royalty, compensation and damages?

 

          For the fact that Honourable Justice Kumai Bayang Akaahs failed woefully to be bound by the pleadings of Mobil Oil and record of the courts, it is apparently cleared that Honourable Justice Kumai Bayang Akaahs erred in law. In Nigerian Laws, courts are bound by the pleadings of the parties as demonstrated in the suit number (Suit No: SC.61/2009) delivered by MOHAMMED, J.S.C.

 

 

In The Supreme Court of Nigeria

On Friday, the 25th day of January, 2013

Suit No: SC.61/2009

 

PRINCE ABUBAKAR AUDU

Versus

FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA

 

 

                   "The law is trite that an appellate Court cannot go outside the records of appeal in search of evidence favourable to any of the parties. Like pleadings which bind parties at the High Court, the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court, as appellate Courts, are clearly bound by the records of appeal.

PER: MOHAMMED, J.S.C. (P.10)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Conclusion

                    In order to succeed in life, your desire for success should be greater than your fear of failure. At the inception of this write-up, I affirmed that – “my vast Accountancy and Legal Knowledge in the financial world most especially patent-rights investments exhibited ostensibly that no investor complains of financial crises when invested in company dealing in perfectly inelastic commodities.” CCNL invention is associated with Petroleum Products, Liquefied Natural Gas, & Other Barrel Gases which are perfectly inelastic commodities in nature. Any sharp increase in the prices of those inevitable commodities has no impact on the level of consumption. As a result of this, the request for Anti-Corrosive Special Paint for the extraction of Petroleum Products, Liquefied Natural Gas, & Other Barrel Gases will be inexhaustible.

          Base on the above facts and figures among other things, it is manifestly cleared that the investments of CCNL Patentees in the Intellectual Property – RP. 13522 is saved and secured because throughout the case, Mobil Oil admitted on continuous infringement on the patented invention of King Professor CJA Uwemedimoh. Mobil Oil categorically pleaded that they were even entitled in law to continue to apply and use Anti-Corrosive Special Paint in the extraction of Petroleum Products, Liquefied Natural Gas, & Other Barrel Gases.  Why Honourable Justice Kumai Bayang Akaahs cried more than the bereaved by defending Mobil Oil on allegations Mobil Oil never had the courage to deny? The Legal Team of CCNL is now in the Supreme Court of Nigeria to correct this judicial fallacy of Honourable Justice Kumai Bayang Akaahs. Without any controversy, justice will be done to the case in the Supreme Court of Nigeria in realization of the fact that the purpose of appeal is to correct the errors in the verdicts of the lower courts.

 

 

Outstanding Questions

 

(A) Miss Memshima Winifred Nambativ   from Abuja, Nigeria
When payment commences, will it be done through existing banks or through Comandclem Banks that are not even built yet?

 

(B) Shamsideen Aremu From Lagos, Nigeria
Question (1B)

Why can’t Comandclem Nigeria Limited take massive actions against Mobil Producing Nigeria Unlimited in order to get the royalties fast from them?
(2) How can we believe what you are telling us?

(3) Do you want us to die before you take action against Mobil Producing Nigeria Unlimited?

 

 

 

                       Detailed answers shall be provided to the above outstanding questions in our subsequent publications. Thanks for your understanding.

 

NAME: Yusuf Nurudeen (B.Sc., AAT, ACA)

POSITION: CCNL National Marketing Manager

Office Address: CCNL Zonal Headquarters,

 Number 4, Ogudu Road,

Ojota,

 Lagos State.

MOBIL NUMBER: +2347032522248

EMAIL ADDRESS: thepatenteesonlinenewspaper@yahoo.com

TWETTER NAME: www.twitter.com/COMANDLEM_NIG

     FACEBOOK NAME: COMANDCLEM PATENTEES

    CCNL CORPORATE FACEBOOK ADDRESS:

                                                                www.facebook.com/COMANDCLEMNIGERIALIMITED

CCNL CORPORATE WEBSITE: www.comandclemonline.com

    CCNL FORUM: www.comandclemonline.com/forum/index.php?

CCNL FORUM: www.comandclem.org/forum/index.php?topic=3.32

 

 

 

CONTENT                                                                                       PAGES

(1) Introdcution…………………………………………………………………………………          1 - 3

(2) Why You Claimed Our Investment With

 Comandclem Nigeria Limited Is Saved?............................................      4 - 6

(3) Judicial Surgical Operation On The Verdict Delivered

 By Honourable Justice Kumai Bayang Akaahs …….…………….………         7 - 9

 (4) The Interpretation Of The Verdict Delivered

 By Honourable Justice Kumai Bayang Akaahs

On Statute Barred ……………………………………………………….………………….         10 - 12

(5) Reasons Why Your Investment In Comandclem

Nigeria Limited Is Saved And Secured…………………………………….               13

 (6) Reasons Why CCNL Patentees  Should Not

Express Any Fear And Invest More……………………….…………………..              14

(7) The Principles Of Pleadings

Interpretation Of The Judgment………………………………..……………….         15 -16

(8) Evidence Of Continuous Infringement

On The Patent Right RP: 13522 By………………………………………………           17- 20

 (9) How Honourable Justice Kumai Bayang

Akaahs Erred In Law……………………………………………..…………………………          21 - 23

(10) Conclusion ……………………………………………………….………………………….          24 -27

  

 

 

 

 

 

                                  

Introduction

Why are you telling us stories?

 

                         Mr. Shamsideen Aremu, I am very happy to meet you Sir. I consider it paramount to clarify certain issues before you today. For your information, I am not a story-teller but An Illustrious National Marketing Manager of Comandclem Nigeria Limited from Number 4, Ogudu Road, Ojota, Lagos State. I report the legitimate activities and objectives of Comandclem Nigeria Limited with the aid of international network called internet. When The Libration News Paper failed to publish for some logistic reasons, I single handedly publish The Patentees` Online News Papers, & The Inventor’s Magazine. I have a lot of those publications to my credit. I work for free without any salary. Get this fact clear today if you are not aware before. I came out to help CCNL Patentees updated on facts and figures about their investments.

 I don’t deserve any form of insult. Ok?

 

 

                  Mr. Shamsideen Aremu for your information, I report the transformation of Nigerians most especially the CCNL Patentees from poverty to affluence, from joblessness to gainful employment, from worst health conditions to improved heath situation, from worst road network to improved road network system. I report facts and figures backed-up with verifiable documentary evidences. Hello, get it clear. This is a serious issue, not a joking matter. I stand out among hundreds of thousands on the internet. There was an occasion I personally spent over =N=9,500:00 to scan CCNL litigation documents on the internet in my genuine missions to expose the criminal acts committed by Mobil oil in Nigerian economy, and to regularly inform CCNL Patentees on the level of their investments in Comandclem Nigeria Limited . I repeat without any reservation to anybody, I don’t deserve any form of insult from anybody, including you. Ok?

 

            In as much as I have been able to clarify this misrepresentation of my personality and mission statements, let me attend to your questions. Each time you ask me questions on face book – www.facebook.com/ComandclemNigeriaLimited, I always refer you to CCNL forums www.comandclemonline.com/forum & www.comandclem.org/forum. The reasons are that, I want a wider participation of viewers, and centralization of pools of information. Several cyber attacks by agents of Mobil Oil on those forums accounted for little challenges in terms of unsuccessful registration of patentees in the forums. We shall soon get over those cyber attacks challenges. With God, everything is possible.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Why You Claimed Our Investment With

 Comandclem Nigeria Limited

Is Saved And You Are Not Taking Massive Action Against

 Mobil Producing Nigeria Unlimited

 In Order To Get The Royalties Fast From Them?

 

 

             Mr. Shamsideen Aremu kindly allows me to sub-divide the above questions into two questions to enable me to crush them to powder - according to Justice Gladys K. Olotu of the Federal High Court, Uyo.

 

Question (1A)

Why you claimed our investment with Comandclem Nigeria Limited is saved?

Question (1B)

Why can’t Comandclem Nigeria Limited take massive actions against Mobil Producing Nigeria Limited in order to get the royalties fast from them?

 

Respond To Question (1A)

 

            When I read through this question, I was very happy in the sense that the question gives me wide ranges of opportunities to demonstrate before you the cogent reasons why you should invest more and upgrade your investment in CCNL from a Patentee to a Noble, even a Knight, if possible. My vast Accountancy and Legal knowledge in the financial world most especially patent-rights investments exhibited ostensibly that no investor complains of financial crises when invested in company dealing in perfectly inelastic commodities. Your investment in patent-right is not only saved but also risk-free. In this type of investment, your money works for you. Yes! I mean it.

                   To show that your investment in CCNL is saved and secured, I need to employ some financial and legal terms to demonstrate my arguments before you. For the purpose of this write-up, I will limit my financial and legal terms to the investment sayings of Warren Buffett, and The Principles Of Pleadings & Doctrine Of Stare Decises with respect to the litigation between Comandclem Nigeria Limited and Mobil Producing Nigeria Unlimited in the Supreme Court of Nigeria -SC./69/2011. Mr. Shamsideen Aremu, I sense that you are afraid of the possible outcomes of the pending litigation between Comandclem Nigeria Limited and Mobil oil in the Supreme Court of Nigeria. It is axiomatic to affirm that – risk comes only from not knowing what you are doing. In Comandclem Nigeria Limited, we (The Management Team headed by King Professor CJA Uwemedimoh) knew what we have been doing in the past, what we are doing now, and what we shall do in the future. As a result of those, we bear no risk in all our dealings. Yes, I mean it. No shaking. With God, everything is not only possible but also achievable.

                          

            I will not fail to make references to the Judgment delivered by Honourable Justice Kumai Bayang Akaahs in an honest bid to clarify hidden issues unknown to majorities of CCNL Patentees. In carrying out a judicial surgical operation on the verdicts delivered by Honourable Justice Kumai Bayang Akaahs, I will show clearly parts of his rulings in favour of CCNL, and the other parts unfavourable to CCNL - now being contested in the Supreme Court of Nigeria. At the end of the day, I will demonstrate before you justifiable reasons why Mobil Oil will fail in the Supreme Court of Nigeria. Yes, I mean it. CCNL will get the royalty because of the fact that parties are bound by their pleadings. You cannot eat your cake and have it back. In law, it is called The Principles Of Approbation & Reprobation.

 

 

Judicial Surgical Operation

 On The Verdict Delivered By

Honourable Justice Kumai Bayang Akaahs

 

(A) Part Of The Rulings Favourable To CCNL

 

(1)         The Ownership Of The Patent Right RP: 13522.-Now Being Contested By Mobil Oil In Their Cross Appeal Filed In The Supreme Court Of Nigeria

Honourable Justice Kumai Bayang Akaahs said and I quote

 

                   I wish to say straightaway that having applied for the patent and the patent certificate No. RP:13522 was issued (Ex. 2) Comandclem Nigeria Limited became the registered Patentee in the invention called Anti-Corrosive Special paint for QIT (Tran steel Blue, White Enamel Q.A.D.) with effect from 5/8/99.

 

(2) The Case of CCNL Is Not Contrary To Public Policy. - Now Being Contested By Mobil Oil In Their Cross Appeal Filed In The Supreme Court Of Nigeria.

Honourable Justice Kumai Bayang Akaahs said and I quote

 

                    I do not agree with the trial judge that an agreement to pay $2:00 per barrel of every petroleum product to plaintiffs would necessarily be against public policy.

 

 

(B) Parts Of The Rulings Unfavourable To CCNL- now being contested in The Supreme Court of Nigeria by CCNL

 

(1)        The Case of CCNL Is Statute Barred Including Paragraph 29 (iii), (iv), (v) and (viii)

 

Honourable Justice Kumai Bayang Akaahs said and I quote

 

                       -As at the time the Court of Appeal (Justice Chukwuma-Eneh) ruled that the claims in paragraph 29 (iii), (iv), (v) and (viii) of the Amended Statement of Claim were not affected by the limitation law, there was no consideration of the evidence to be adduced.

                        -As it turned out the purported infringement occurred in the early 1980s and since the action was commenced in 2000, it is statute barred even if they had proved their case as there is no evidence that the infringement has continued after the Patent for the invention was registered.

 

 

 

The Interpretation Of The Verdict Delivered By

Honourable Justice Kumai Bayang Akaahs

On Statute Barred

 

(1) As at the time Mobil Producing Nigeria Unlimited was said to have infringed the invention of CCNL in 1980s, the said invention was not registered.

(2) The said invention belongs to nobody statutorily between 1980s and 4th of August, 1999 because it was not registered by CCNL during those periods. – Period Of Legal Disability

(3) Comandclem Nigeria Limited became the statutory inventor on 5th of August, 1999 when the invention was registered. – Period Of Legal Ability

(4) After the registration of this invention by CCNL on 5th of August, 1999, Court of Appeal claimed that CCNL failed to show evidence of continuous infringement of the invention by Mobil Oil. – Argument On Continuous Infringement.

(5) Court claimed that Mobil Oil infringed on the said invention in 1980s when it was not registered but a legal action was taken against Mobil Oil in the year 2000 by CCNL, as a result of this 19 years legal disability, the case of CCNL is statute barred.- Argument On Limitation Of Action.

(6) Because of the fact that the case of CCNL is statute barred- (commenced after 19 years as against 5 years according to Akwa-Ibom State Laws) royalty, compensations and damages should not be paid. – Argument On Statute Barred.

(7) As at the time Justice Chukwuma-Eneh ruled that the claims in paragraph 29 (iii), (iv), (v) and (viii) of the Amended Statement of Claim were not statute barred, there was no consideration of the evidence to be adduced.- Doctrine Of Stare Decises,

 

                 Mr. Shamsideen Aremu, please at this juncture, I need your maximum attentions with respect to the issues analyzed above. I can sense some signs of fears and tensions. This is because most of the legal terms demonstrated above may not be appreciated in reference to the legal battle between Comandclem Nigeria Limited and Mobil Producing Nigeria Unlimited in the Supreme Court of Nigeria – SC./69/2011. Members of Anti-Corrosive Vanguard are not intimidated by the judicial pronouncements stated above because of the fact that- We Have Invested In An Idea That Can Be Illustrated With A Crayon. Let me illustrate with a crayon reasons why you should invest more & more, even upgrade your investments in Comandclem Nigeria Limited.

 

Reasons Why Your Investment In

 Comandclem Nigeria Limited

 Is Saved And Secured

 

The Purpose Of An Appeal In The Supreme Court

                        I need to re-emphasize that the Management of Comandclem Nigeria Limited headed by King Professor CJA Uwemedimoh has appealed the above verdict delivered by Honourable Justice Kumai Bayang Akaahs in the Supreme Court of Nigeria with suit number SC/69/2011. CCNL filed an appeal in the Supreme Court of Nigeria to correct some fundamental errors in the verdicts of Honourable Justice Kumai Bayang Akaahs of the Federal Court Of Appeal Calabar Judicial Division.

                According to Honourable Justice Nwali Sylvester Ngwuta – Justice Supreme Court, He said and I quote.

               "An appeal is a resort to a superior Court to review the decision of an inferior court and find out whether on the facts placed before it, and applying the relevant and applicable law, the inferior court came to a right or wrong decision.

 

 Per: NGWUTA, J.S.C.- Suit No: SC.125/2003

 

 

 

Reasons Why CCNL Patentees

Should Not Express Any Fear

And

Invest More.

 

              According to Warren Buffet, he said and I quote.

 I will tell you how to become rich. Close the doors. Be fearful when others are greedy. Be greedy when others are fearful. At this level of the case, potential or existing CCNL Patentees should be greedy to invest in the intellectual property of Comandclem Nigeria Limited – RP:13522. This is not only because of the facts that Investment In Knowledge Pays The Best Interest but also The Principles Of Pleadings, Doctrine Of Stare Decises, And Principles Of Ratio Decidendi are favourable to Comandclem Nigeria Limited in the suit number SC./69/2011.

                         It is apparent that the above principles of laws may not be appreciated in the sense that most of my readers lack basic legal knowledge in litigations in reference to the legal battle between Comandclem Nigeria Limited and Mobil Producing Nigeria Unlimited in the Supreme Court of Nigeria. As a result of above, I shall explain each of those legal terms in reference to suit number SC./69/2011. At the end of the day, you will agree with me that your investment in Comandclem Nigeria Limited is saved and secured; and you will have reasons to invest more.

 

 

The Principles Of Pleadings

 

Honourable Justice Kumai Bayang Akaahs said and I quote

                        -As it turned out the purported infringement occurred in the early 1980s and since the action was commenced in 2000, it is statute barred even if they had proved their case as there is no evidence that the infringement has continued after the Patent for the invention was registered.

Interpretation of the judgment

                       Honourable Justice Kumai Bayang Akaahs held that Mobil Oil infringed the invention of the CCNL in 1980s, but CCNL should show evidence that after the registration of the invention on 5th of August, 1999, the infringement of the patented invention of King Uwemedimoh RP:13522 was continuous.

                       The Federal Court of Appeal, Calabar Judicial Division before Honourable Justice Kumai Bayang Akaahs held that CCNL should show evidence of continuous infringement on the patented invention RP:13522 after registration before compensation, damages and royalties could be paid.

 

               The above judicial pronouncement exhibited golden opportunities for potential and existing patentees to invest huge amount of capital into the intellectual property of Comandclem Nigeria Limited so as to reap bumper return on investment. Substantial proportion of your income should be tailored toward investment because your expenditure on investment has positive impacts on your level of financial success. According to Charles A. Jaffe, he said and I quote

 

. It is not your salary that makes you rich.

It is your spending habit that makes you rich.

 

           Here is an ample opportunity to turn =N=30,000:00 investment on intellectual property to =N=30,000:00 return on investment on monthly bases. Business opportunity comes but once in a life time. Grab this opportunity now before it is too late.

 

                     What is required from the Management of Comandclem Nigeria Limited before the Honourable Justices of the Supreme Court of Nigeria is evidence of continuous infringement of the patented invention of King Professor Uwemedimoh – RP: 13522 so as to be entitled to compensation, damages and most importantly, royalty. The ability of the CCNL Legal Counsels to demonstrate this evidence of continuous infringement amounts to MEGA-MONEY evaluated in terms of COMPENSATION, DAMAGES AND ROYALTIES. Yes, I mean it.

 

 

Evidence Of Continuous Infringement

On The Patent Right RP: 13522 By

Mobil Producing Nigeria Unlimited

 

 

               On 9th of May, 2007, Mobil Producing Nigeria Unlimited filed an Amended Statement Defense in respond to the Amended Statement of Claim filed by Comandclem Nigeria Limited on 20th of November, 2001.The Management of Mobil Producing Nigeria Unlimited pleaded and admitted as follows

Paragraph 54 (ii)

               At the date of filling of the patent application by the 1st plaintiff (King Professor CJA Uwemedimoh) in respect of the alleged paints/chemicals (Anti-Corrosive Special Paint), the defendants (Mobil Producing Nigeria Unlimited) were already conducting an undertaking in Nigeria with respect to the efficacy of the paints that will suit the defendants` oil pipelines, and as a result of the said undertaking, they were already manufacturing the paints (Anti-Corrosive Special Paint) and/ or applying for the process for the manufacture of the paints. Therefore the defendants (Mobil Producing Nigeria Unlimited) are entitled to continue to apply and use those paints/chemicals (Anti-Corrosive Special Paint) in law.

 

                The above expressly pleaded and admitted act of continuous infringement of the patented invention of CCNL – PR: 13522 after the registration are evidences required to be exhibited before the Honourable Justices of the Supreme Court of Nigeria so as to be entitled to damages, compensation and royalties.  As a result of the above undisputable and inerasable act of illegality confidently perpetrated by Mobil Producing Nigeria Unlimited, no existing or potential CCNL patentees should have any course to express fear over their investments because of the fact that both the court and parties are bound by their pleadings.

 

            The case between Comandclem Nigeria Limited and Mobil Producing Nigeria Unlimited in the Supreme Court of Nigeria only requires the Legal Counsels of CCNL to exhibit Paragraph 54 (ii) of Amended Statement Defense to the Honourable Justices of the Supreme Court of Nigeria in reference to pleaded and admitted claims of continuous infringement on the patented invention of King CJA Uwemedimoh so as to get royalty, damages and compensations.  This admitted claim is enough to sustain CCNL victory in the Supreme Court of Nigeria as demonstrated by Honourable Justice Niki TobiJ.S.C in the Suit No: SC.384/2001. See below.

 

 

 

In The Supreme Court of Nigeria

On Friday, the 30th day of June, 2006

Suit No: SC.384/2001

 

BONIFACE ANYIKA &

 COMPANY LAGOS NIGERIA LIMITED

 VERSUS

KATSINA U. D. UZOR

 

                    “Pleadings are averments by the party which he claims to be the facts of the case. As far as the party is concerned, the facts pleaded have the content and the strength to give him judgment in the case. In the case of the plaintiff, the pleadings without more, can only give him judgment where the defendant admits the claim or relief.”

Per: Jutice Niki TobiJ.S.C. (P.12, Paras. A-B)

 

 

                       Base on the above authority, it is manifestly cleared that the Management of Mobil Producing Nigeria Unlimited headed by Mark R. Ward must be bound by their pleadings in the sense that they have admitted the claims of CCNL. In law, whatever has been expressly admitted in the pleadings requires no further proof. Any admission made in pleadings binds a party making the admission and therefore the facts need no further proof.”

 Per: Sowemimo, JSC. (Oke-Bola v. Molake (1975) 12 SC 61 at 62)  

 

 

            Mobil Oil is only buying time, they must pay CCNL royalty. With this and other weapons of laws yet to be illustrated, CCNL Patentees should have course to celebrate in advance.

 

 

 

How

 Honourable Justice

Kumai Bayang Akaahs

 Erred In Law

                At this juncture, it is sensible to exhibit how Honourable Justice Kumai Bayang Akaahs misunderstood the case- (No. CA/C/15/2009) before him by defending Mobil Oil on allegations Mobil Oil conspicuously pleaded and admitted in their Statement Of Defense. At no time, right from the inception of the case, the Management of Mobil Producing Nigeria Unlimited headed by Mark R. Ward categorically denied the continuous infringement on the patented invention of CCNL after registration of the invention on 5th of August, 1999. Mobil Oil confidently pleaded and admitted that they were already manufacturing, and even entailed to continue to apply and use in law the patented invention of CCNL after registration on 5th of August, 1999 - Paragraph 54 (ii) of Amended Statement Defense dated on 9th of May, 2007.

 

 

      The questions are

(1) Does Honourable Justice Kumai Bayang Akaahs has jurisdiction to defend Mobil Oil on allegation expressly pleaded and admitted by Mobil Oil?

(2) Why Honourable Justice Kumai Bayang Akaahs was not bound by the pleadings (Paragraph 54 (ii)) of Mobil Oil on continuous infringement on the intellectual property of CCNL?

(3) Why Honourable Justice Kumai Bayang Akaahs raised issues not in dispute between CCNL and Mobil Oil only to deny the first black inventor the legitimate royalty, compensation and damages?

 (4) Why Honourable Justice Kumai Bayang Akaahs raised issued not before the court only to deny the first black inventor the legitimate royalty, compensation and damages?

 (5) Why Honourable Justice Kumai Bayang Akaahs went outside the pleadings of the parties, and records of the courts in search of evidence only to deny the first black inventor the legitimate royalty, compensation and damages?

 

          For the fact that Honourable Justice Kumai Bayang Akaahs failed woefully to be bound by the pleadings of Mobil Oil and record of the courts, it is apparently cleared that Honourable Justice Kumai Bayang Akaahs erred in law. In Nigerian Laws, courts are bound by the pleadings of the parties as demonstrated in the suit number (Suit No: SC.61/2009) delivered by MOHAMMED, J.S.C.

 

 

In The Supreme Court of Nigeria

On Friday, the 25th day of January, 2013

Suit No: SC.61/2009

 

PRINCE ABUBAKAR AUDU

Versus

FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA

 

 

                   "The law is trite that an appellate Court cannot go outside the records of appeal in search of evidence favourable to any of the parties. Like pleadings which bind parties at the High Court, the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court, as appellate Courts, are clearly bound by the records of appeal.

PER: MOHAMMED, J.S.C. (P.10)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Conclusion

                    In order to succeed in life, your desire for success should be greater than your fear of failure. At the inception of this write-up, I affirmed that – “my vast Accountancy and Legal Knowledge in the financial world most especially patent-rights investments exhibited ostensibly that no investor complains of financial crises when invested in company dealing in perfectly inelastic commodities.” CCNL invention is associated with Petroleum Products, Liquefied Natural Gas, & Other Barrel Gases which are perfectly inelastic commodities in nature. Any sharp increase in the prices of those inevitable commodities has no impact on the level of consumption. As a result of this, the request for Anti-Corrosive Special Paint for the extraction of Petroleum Products, Liquefied Natural Gas, & Other Barrel Gases will be inexhaustible.

          Base on the above facts and figures among other things, it is manifestly cleared that the investments of CCNL Patentees in the Intellectual Property – RP. 13522 is saved and secured because throughout the case, Mobil Oil admitted on continuous infringement on the patented invention of King Professor CJA Uwemedimoh. Mobil Oil categorically pleaded that they were even entitled in law to continue to apply and use Anti-Corrosive Special Paint in the extraction of Petroleum Products, Liquefied Natural Gas, & Other Barrel Gases.  Why Honourable Justice Kumai Bayang Akaahs cried more than the bereaved by defending Mobil Oil on allegations Mobil Oil never had the courage to deny? The Legal Team of CCNL is now in the Supreme Court of Nigeria to correct this judicial fallacy of Honourable Justice Kumai Bayang Akaahs. Without any controversy, justice will be done to the case in the Supreme Court of Nigeria in realization of the fact that the purpose of appeal is to correct the errors in the verdicts of the lower courts.

 

 

Outstanding Questions

 

(A) Miss Memshima Winifred Nambativ   from Abuja, Nigeria
When payment commences, will it be done through existing banks or through Comandclem Banks that are not even built yet?

 

(B) Shamsideen Aremu From Lagos, Nigeria
Question (1B)

Why can’t Comandclem Nigeria Limited take massive actions against Mobil Producing Nigeria Unlimited in order to get the royalties fast from them?
(2) How can we believe what you are telling us?

(3) Do you want us to die before you take action against Mobil Producing Nigeria Unlimited?

 

 

 

                       Detailed answers shall be provided to the above outstanding questions in our subsequent publications. Thanks for your understanding.

 

NAME: Yusuf Nurudeen (B.Sc., AAT, ACA)

POSITION: CCNL National Marketing Manager

Office Address: CCNL Zonal Headquarters,

 Number 4, Ogudu Road,

Ojota,

 Lagos State.

MOBIL NUMBER: +2347032522248

EMAIL ADDRESS: thepatenteesonlinenewspaper@yahoo.com

TWETTER NAME: www.twitter.com/COMANDLEM_NIG

     FACEBOOK NAME: COMANDCLEM PATENTEES

    CCNL CORPORATE FACEBOOK ADDRESS:

                                                                www.facebook.com/COMANDCLEMNIGERIALIMITED

CCNL CORPORATE WEBSITE: www.comandclemonline.com

    CCNL FORUM: www.comandclemonline.com/forum/index.php?

CCNL FORUM: www.comandclem.org/forum/index.php?topic=3.32

 

Breaking News: CCNL versus Mobil Oil
Tony Ukam Denied Notice Of Case Withdrawal
As
The Supreme Court Of Nigeria Woke-Up From Its Slumber To Discover An Appeal (SC/69/2011)
It Entertained Four Times Recently Has Been
Withdrawn Three Years Ago.


Contents
1.0 Introduction
2.0 History Of The Case In The Supreme Court Of Nigeria.
3.0 The Live Event Of The Proceeding In The Court
4.0 CCNL Writes Professor Tony Ukam
5.0 Reply Of Professor Tony Ukam To Letter Of Withdrawal
6.0 The Shocking Revelations And Top Secrets In Suit SC/69/2011
7.0 Legal Justifications To Restore Appeal Sc./69/2011
8.0 Appreciation To The Court, and Conclusion



1.0 Introduction
The case between Comandclem Nigeria Limited and Mobil Producing Nigeria Unlimited over a multi-million dollar patent right infringement of (RP:13522), and breach of sole supplier agreement has taken a new and dramatic dimension in recent times.

There are shocking revelations and top secrets being uncovered recently to the surprise of court observers, and keen followers of the case which is as old as the present democratic experimentation.

2.0 History Of The Case In The Supreme Court Of Nigeria.

The appeal in question (SC./69/2011) has been categorically ruled upon by the Honourable Justices of the Supreme Court of Nigeria in four distinct times (4) before now. For record purposes, those four distinct occasions are stated below:
(1) 10th of July, 2012;
Presiding Judge was Honourable Justice Aloma Mariam. (NJC)
(2) 29th of January, 2013:
Presiding Justice was Honourable Justice Aloma Mariam (NJC)
(3) 8th of April, 2013;
Presiding Judge was Honourable Justice Mahmud Muhammed (JSC)
(4) 30th of October, 2013;
Presiding Judge was Honourable Justice Tanko Mahammed (JSC)

Haven entertained the Multi-Million Dollar Patent-Right Infringement Legal Suit against Mobil Producing Nigeria Unlimited in four distinct court sittings, Honourable Justice Walter Nkanu Onnoghen (JSC) dismissed the 14th years old case between CCNL and Mobil Oil on 5th of May, 2014 on the ground that Professor Tony Ukam (Former Counsel of CCNL) had filed a notice of case withdrawal as far back as 24th of March, 2011 when he said and I quote.
“There is nothing to be adjourned as the appeal withdrawn has ceased to exist. In the circumstance, appeal SC./69/2011 withdrawn is hereby dismissed.”

3.0 The Live Event Of The Proceeding In The Court
Before the above pronouncement was made by the presiding judge, Honourable Justice Walter Nkanu Onnoghen (JSC) on 5th of May, 2014 in the Supreme Court of Nigeria, the court asked the leading legal counsel of Mobil Oil, Dr. Eyimofe Atake, and the leading counsel of CCNL, Rev. Jesse-Daniel Onuigbo ESQ. some questions to uncover the shacking revelations and the top secrets behind the appeal. Below is an extract of the blow by blow account of the proceedings in the court. Happy reading.

The Presiding Judge: Honourable Justice Walter Samuel Nkanu Onnoghen asked Mobil Oil`s Counsel a question as follows.
Dr. Eyimofe Atake, Have you been served with the notice of case withdrawal of this appeal filed on 24th of March, 2011?

Mobil Oil: Dr. Eyimofe Atake replied as follows.
No my lord. We haven’t. We are not aware. We haven`t been served any notice of withdrawal of this appeal, my lords.

Comandclem Nigeria Limited: Rev. Jesse-Daniel Onuigbo ESQ. interrupted and made the follow statements.
My lords, I am very surprise. I am not aware of the alleged notice of case withdrawal of this appeal, my lords. My client never authorized Dr. Tony Ukam to file the alleged notice of case withdrawal, my lords.

4.0 CCNL Writes Professor Tony Ukam
It is on record that on 12th of May, 2014, King Professor Emeritus CJA Uwemedimo officially wrote a letter to Professor Tony Ukam questioning him on the justifications to withdraw his case without his instructions to that effect. Below is an extract of the letter.

“My shock and surprise stemmed from the fact that I never instructed you to apply to withdraw the aforesaid appeal; neither did you notify me of your having done the same till date.”


5.0 Reply Of Professor Tony Ukam To Letter Of Withdrawal
Professor Tony Ukam completely denied filling any notice of case withdrawal in his respond dated 16th of May, 2014 when he said and I quote as extract of the letter.

Permit me to say that;
(c) Apart from the processes you mandated me to file in 2011 as a fall-out meeting with former President Obasanjo, I’ve never filed anything since 2012 when you decided to abandone me for lawyers who knew not the sweat/history of Comandclem and the innocent patentees”

6.0 The Shocking Revelations And Top Secrets In Suit SC/69/2011

During the swearing in ceremony of Justice Ibrahim Mallam Bukar in Abuja early this year, Honourable Justice Aloma (JSC) advocated for a public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the Nigerian judges when you said and I quote.

“Justice must be rooted in confidence and that confidence is destroyed when right thinking members of the society doubt the neutrality of the judges”

The questions of right thinking members of the society are stated below.

(a) Who can explain how a fake notice of case withdrawal got into the case file SC./69/2011 that was nowhere to be seen in the last four times Supreme Court of Nigeria entertained the case?

(b) Why the Honourble Justices of the Supreme Court of Nigeria progressed in error to dismiss an appeal which its alleged/fake notice of case withdrawal was not serve to Mobil Producing Nigeria Unlimited as provided for in the rules of the court? See Supreme Court Rule Of 1984, Order (8) Rule (6) (1).

(c) Why the Honourble Justices of the Supreme Court of Nigeria progressed in error to dismiss an appeal where evidence before the court showed that there is no consent between CCNL and Mobil Oil to withdraw the case from court as provided for in the rules of the court? See Supreme Court Rule Of 1984, Order (8) Rule (6) (4).


7.0 Legal Justifications To Restore Appeal Sc./69/2011
It is the position of Anti-Corrosive Vanguard that the Honourable Justices of the Supreme Court of Nigeria should consider the restoration of appeal sc./69/2011 in view of the following legal facts and bases.
(A) CCNL former counsel claimed he never file the alleged/fake notice of case withdrawal.
(B) Mobil Oil was not served the alleged/fake notice of case withdrawal.
(C) There is no consent between CCNL and Mobil to withdraw the appeal from the Supreme Court of Nigeria.

8.0 Appreciation To The Court, and Conclusion
We shall not fail to appreciate the wisdoms and knowledge of the honourable justices of the supreme court of Nigeria in light realization of the fact that the former legal counsel was not authorized to file a notice of case withdrawal when the court said and I quote.

“if you want your appeal re-listed, you will bring an application subsequently on the bases that the former appellant`s counsel was not authorized to file a notice of case withdrawal, as simple as that.”
Per: Supreme Court of Nigeria
Suit No: sc./69/2011
Date: 5/5/2014

Name: Yusuf Nurudeen (B. Sc, AAT, ACA)
Head Office Address:
CCNL Zonal Headquarters,
Position: CCNL Marketing Manager
Number 4, Ogudu Road,
Ojota,
Lagos State.
Ondo State Office:
Position: CCNL Ondo State Manager
No 32. Oba-Adesida Road,
Opposite Airtel Office,
S.O. Area,
Akure.
Mobil Number: +2347032522248
CCNL Twitter Name: www.twitter.com/Comandlem_Nig
CCNL Facebook Name: Comandclem Patentees
CCNL Corporate Facebook Address: www.facebook.com/COMANDCLEMNIGERIALIMITED
CCNL Corporate Website: www.comandclemonline.com
CCNL Forum: www.comandclemonline.com/forum/index.php?
Is The Supreme Court Of Nigeria An Impartial Umpire?
(SC./69/2011)
Why The Justitia Of Justice Onnoghen (JSC)
Was Not Blind-Folded In Sc./69.2011?

Contents
1.0 Introduction

2.0 Are The Attributes Of Justitia Inculcated In The Judges Of The Supreme Court Of Nigeria?

3.0 Dispensation Of Justice Based On The Personalities and Public Figures Of Legal Counsels.

4.0 An Extract Of Live Proceeding In The Supreme Court Of Nigeria On 5th Of May, 2014 Between CCNL And Mobil Oil(Sc./69/2011).

5.0 Is Honourable Justice Walter Nkanu Onnoghen (JSC) An Impartial Umpire In The Suit Number Sc./69/2011?
6.0 Conclusion




1.0 Introduction
At the entrance of the Supreme Court of Nigeria on 5th of May, 2014, for the hearing of a fourteen-year-old case of patent right infringement allegation against Mobil Producing Nigeria Unlimited over the continuous use of the patented invention of Comandclem Nigeria limited, RP:13522, I saw a statute called justitia.

This statute depicts a blind-folded lady carrying a scale in her left hand, and a double-edged sword in her right hand.

Court observers, case analysts and court audiences assumed that with the scale, she measures the strength of cases presented before her for adjudication, while the sword which symbolizes the power of reason, and justices that may be wielded either for or against any of the parties found guilty in the face of the law.

A blind-folded justitia connotes objectivity in that justice should be meted out objectively without fear or favour, regardless of identity, money, power or societal status.

2.0 Are The Attributes Of Justitia Inculcated In The Judges Of The Supreme Court Of Nigeria?
The entire attributes of justitia should be reflected in the conducts of Nigerian Judges so as to boost the public confidence in the impartiality, integrity, fairness, and objectivity of the courts.

Those unique attributes of justitia were appreciated by Honourable Justice Aloma (CJN) during the swearing in ceremony of Justice Zainab Bulkachuwa as the President, Court of Appeal in recent times when she said and I quote,
“It is pertinent at this juncture to stress that the discharge of the obligations of this venerated office must be executed with the utmost sense of fair play, impartiality and dedication to duty.”

3.0 Dispensation Of Justice Based On The Personalities and Public Figures Of Legal Counsels.

Once again, a blind-folded status of justitia implies that justice should be done without fear or favour, regardless of identities, personalities, money, power or societal status.

But unfortunately, the justitia status in the case between CCNL and Mobil Oil is not a blind-folded status but an open-eyed status that dispenses justice based on the social status and personalities of legal counsels that represented the litigants.

Court observers and case analysts were not only disappointed by the conducts of Honourable Justice Walter Samuel Nkanu Onneghen (JSC) but also doubted his impartiality in the dispensation of justice in the Supreme Court of Nigeria on 5th of May, 2014 in a case involving Comandclem Nigeria Limited and Mobil Producing Nigeria Unlimited, suit number SC./69/2011

Case followers, court observers, and case analysts were dumbfounded when the presiding judge, Honourable Justice Walter Samuel Nkanu Onneghen (JSC), attacked, intimidated, challenged, and disrespected the religious title of the legal counsel that represented CCNL, Reverend Jesse Daniels Onuigbo Esq. during the introduction of appearances of the legal counsels for their respective litigants.

What would have prompted a judge of the apex court of the land to disrespect the religious title of a legal counsel while commended the professional and traditional titles of other legal counsels?

Why the justitia of Honourable Justice Walter Samuel Nkanu Onneghen (JSC) is an open-eyed status who discriminated between the religious title and traditional titles of the legal counsels that represented litigants?

Below is the blow by blow account of the live proceeding of events that unfolded which led to the gross embarrassment and an outright disrespect of the religious title of the legal counsel that represented CCNL, Reverend Jesse Daniels Onuigbo Esq by Honourable Justice Walter Samuel Nkanu Onneghen (JSC) on 5th of May, 2014 in the Supreme Court of Nigeria. Happy reading.


4.0 An Extract Of Live Proceeding In The Supreme Court Of Nigeria On 5th Of May, 2014 Between CCNL And Mobil Oil.
Sc./69/2011
During The Official Introduction Of The Legal Counsels Of Parties
CCNL lawyer opened the floor and said.
My lords, I announce the appearance for the Appellants.
My name is Reverend Jesse Daniels Onuigbo Esq.

Honourable Justice Walter Nkanu Onnoghen (JSC) replied reluctantly and said
Now, what is your name?
You said you are what?

CCNL Lawyer respectively replied and said
My name is Reverend Jesse Daniels Onuigbo.

Honourable Justice Walter Nkanu Onnoghen (JSC) angrily replied and said
Forget about the Reverend, and talk.

When the legal counsel of Mobil Oil failed to introduce himself to The Honourable Justices of the Supreme Court of Nigeria within a reasonable period time, Honourable Justice Walter Nkanu Onnoghen (JSC) said softly.
We are waiting.

After Some Minutes, Mobil Oil’s Lawyer Replied softly and said.
Appearing for the Defendant/Respondent/Cross Appellant, Doctor Ayimofe Atake. With me, my lords are Chief Mike Ozekhome (SAN), Chief Uko Udom (SAN), Sam Akpabio ,Olubusayo Ibrahim, Chenaye Orghe.

5.0 Is Honourable Justice Walter Nkanu Onnoghen (JSC) An Impartial Umpire In The Suit Number Sc./69/2011?

According to The Code of Conduct for Judicial Officers in Nigeria, Rule Number 1 and I quote,
“A Judicial Officer should respect and comply with the laws of the land and should conduct himself at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the Judiciary.”

From the above code of conduct for judicial officers in Nigeria, court observers and case followers are left with no option than to conclude that Honourable Justice Walter Nkanu Onnoghen (JSC) has failed to exhibit dispositions to boost public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the Supreme Court of Nigerian`s Judges.

Why Honourable Justice Walter Nkanu Onnoghen (JSC) should attacked, intimidated, challenged, and disrespected the religious title of the legal counsel that represented CCNL, Reverend Jesse Daniels Onuigbo Esq. when he said and I quote,
Forget about the Reverend, and talk?

Why Honourable Justice Walter Nkanu Onnoghen (JSC) failed to attack, intimidate, challenge, and disrespect the traditional and professional titles of Chief Mike Ozekhome (SAN), Dr. Eyimofe Ateke (SAN), and Chief Uko Udom (SAN)?

As a case analyst and court observer, public perceptions on the suspicious and unethical conducts of a presiding judge have immeasurable impacts on the impartiality and integrity of the court.

Public confidence and trust in a judicial system of a country are the barometers with which court audiences, case analysts and court observers measure the honesty, integrity, and impartiality of judges.

This view was supported by Honourable Justice Dahiru Musdapher (JSC) when he said and I quote
“We do not have a garrison or army to fight our cause. Our authority rests solely on the public perception of our integrity and absolute impartiality”
Per: Honourable Justice Dahiru Musdapher (JSC)
Public Lecture: How To Restore Public Confidence In Judiciary.
Date: 8th December, 2008.

6.0 Conclusion
The dispensation of justice based on the social status and professional qualifications of the legal counsels that represented the litigants should be discouraged in its entirety in the interest of justice. This will tremendously promote public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the Nigerian courts.

The justitia of the Supreme Court of Nigeria must be a blind-folded status as against the present open-eyed status that discriminated and disrespected the religious title of a legal counsel.
Judges have a duty to control their emotions and should refrain, as much as possible from making scurrilous comments or insinuations on the acts of public officers done in the discharge of their duties.
The impartiality of the judiciary will be impaired if the judges do not restrain themselves in their behavior and language.
The court should as far as possible limit their pronouncements to the issues necessary for the just decision of the cases before them.
Justice should not only be done but seem to be done.

Name: Yusuf Nurudeen (B. Sc, AAT, ACA)
Head Office Address:
CCNL Zonal Headquarters,
Position: CCNL Marketing Manager
Number 4, Ogudu Road,
Ojota,
Lagos State.
Ondo State Office:
Position: CCNL Ondo State Manager
No 32. Oba-Adesida Road,
Opposite Airtel Office,
S.O. Area,
Akure.
Mobil Number: +2347032522248
CCNL Twitter Name: www.twitter.com/Comandlem_Nig
CCNL Facebook Name: Comandclem Patentees
CCNL Corporate Facebook Address: www.facebook.com/COMANDCLEMNIGERIALIMITED
CCNL Corporate Website: www.comandclemonline.com
CCNL Forum: www.comandclemonline.com/forum/index.php?

Everyone has untapped potential.
You could Be Making 780USD Weekly, it depends on you
view details at http://sarahfreeman11.wix.com/workathome

Let's start by creating two e-currency accounts, Perfect money and Egopay.
*To Create a Perfect Money its free go to or www.perfectmoney.com
*To create a egopay Account its free go to www.egopay.com

 
Let us have to fund your egopay account  with $20 (example)


To fund or Withdraw money from your egopay account go to  https://www.egopay.com/exchange   or google  any reliable exchanger  close to you like www.Naira4dollar.com
and a host of others.
Note(i)   

it is the USD($) account number example  (U1234567)  in the perfect money account you will use while making exchange, and not the ID itself.
(ii), it is the email  address you used to open Egopay, or pecunix account that is your account ID,

 BEGIN TO EARN.

(1). To earn from currency exchange Go to  www.rapidgoldex.com and exchange(EXAMPLE) $50 from your Egopay account to Perfect money account.Note @ rapidgoldex  $1 Egopay->$1.28 perfect money,      so $50 Egopay -> $64 Perfect money USD.

Next step  :  you go to https://magneticexchange.com/   or   https://xchanger.org/   and     re-exchange $64 Perfect money--->$61.32 Egopay
that means   you have made a profit of $11.32 to your Egopay account with your $50 PM.
your Egopay account balance is now $61.32

(2). Repeat the exchange process from egopay---->Perfect money, and perfect money--->Egopay continuously because the more you exchange
between perfect money and  Pecunix ,, the more you earn.

10 times of exchange or about one hour the clear profit will be more than $100 and above depending on your Capital.

You can always increase your capital, because the more money you exchange the faster u make your cash. I can make up to 800 USD per day. doing up to 25 exchange per hour. But there is also no harm in starting small.
To Withdraw money from your Egopay  account go to www.Naira4dollar.com
or   www.standardgoldng.com, or any reliable one close to you.
and sell to them, they will credit your local bank account within few hour.

"The only place where success comes before work is the Dictionary."
Disclaimer:
*This blog is just for illustration purpose the amount you see there can be varied depending on  your ability and capability
*How much money you make depends on your capital and the amount of time you put into this venture.
 

GOOD LUCK

1.0 Introduction
2.0 Fundamental Facts Of The Case
3.0 How The Supreme Court Of Nigeria Lied Against Professor Tony Ukam
4.0 Recommendations Of The Honourable Justices Of The Supreme Court Of Nigeria On The Restoration Of Suit SC./69/2011
5.0 The Restoration Of The Dismissed Suit No SC./69/2011
6.0 The Procedural Approach to the Restoration Of A Dismissed Appeal.
7.0 Would The Proposed Restored Suit Starts Afresh In The Supreme Court Of Nigeria On 7th Of October, 2014?
8.0 Conclusion





1.0 Introduction

On behalf of The Chairman & The Chief Executive Officer Of Comandclem Nigeria Limited, King Professor (Emeritus) CJA Uwemedimo, I appreciate your question in view of its importance to the generality of patentees who might have been misinformed or confused at this crucial stage of the case.

In actual fact, my respond to your question will go a long way to clear air on some rumours in circulations with respect to the erroneously dismissed Appeal filed by CCNL in the Supreme Court of Nigeria.

2.0 Facts Of The Case

On 5th of May, 2014, Honourable Justice Walter Nkanu Samuel Onnoghem (JSC) progressed in a grievous error to dismiss the Appeal (SC./69/2011) filed by CCNL on the ground that the Former Legal Counsel of CCNL (Professor Tony Ukam) had filed a notice of case withdrawal as far back as 24th of March, 2011.

All efforts made by the CCNL lawyer (Rev. Jesse-Daniel Onuigbo ESQ) to convince the court to the effect that the Former CCNL Counsel (Professor Tony Ukam) was neither filed nor authorized to file any notice of case withdrawal proved abortive before the Honourable Justices of the Supreme Court of Nigeria.

Honourable Justice Walter Nkanu Samuel Onnoghem (JSC) was even happy to dismiss the case despite the facts that there was no evidence before the court to show that Mobil Producing Nigeria Unlimited was served a copy of the fake/alleged notice of case withdrawal. And most importantly, there was no evidence before the court to show that both CCNL and Mobil Oil consented to withdraw the case from the Supreme Court of Nigeria.

It is on record that the Supreme Court of Nigeria had entertained the Appeal in question in four (4) distinct times in the past without any notice of case withdrawal in the Case File. Court Observers and Case Analysts doubted the integrity and impartiality of the Supreme Court Judges on how the notice of case withdrawal resurrected in the Case File while hearing the appeal in the fifth (5) times.

Honourable Justice Walter Nkanu Samuel Onnoghem (JSC) erroneously dismissed the appeal when he said and I quote.
“There is nothing to be adjourned as the appeal withdrawn has ceased to exist. In the circumstance, appeal SC./69/2011 withdrawn is hereby dismissed.”

3.0 How The Supreme Court Of Nigeria Lied Against Professor Tony Ukam

On 5th of May, 2014, in the open court of the Supreme Court Of Nigeria, Honourable Justice Walter Nkanu Samuel Onnoghem (JSC) publicly displayed a document termed “Notice of Case withdrawal” allegedly written by the former Counsel of CCNL (Professor Tony Ukam) which formed the legal bases upon which the appeal in question was dismissed.

It is on record that on 12th of May, 2014, King Professor Emeritus CJA Uwemedimo officially wrote a letter to Professor Tony Ukam questioning him on his justifications to withdraw CCNL Appeal without his instructions to that effect. Below is an extract of the letter.

“My shock and surprise stemmed from the fact that I never instructed you to apply to withdraw the aforesaid appeal; neither did you notify me of your having done the same till date.”

Professor Tony Ukam completely denied filing any notice of case withdrawal in his respond dated 16th of May, 2014 when he said and I quote an extract of the letter.

Permit me to say that;
(c) Apart from the processes you mandated me to file in 2011 as a fall-out meeting with former President Obasanjo, I’ve never filed anything since 2012 when you decided to abandone me for lawyers who knew not the sweat/history of Comandclem and the innocent patentees”.

It is the submission of Anti-Corrosive Vanguard that the allegation of case withdrawal leveled against Professor Tony Ukam by the Supreme Court of Nigeria cannot be substantiated in view of the fact that the court could not find the alleged notice of withdrawal in the case file in the first four times the court entertained the matter.

In one word, The Honourable Judges of the Supreme Court of Nigeria lied against Professor Tony Ukam only to dismiss the Appeal filed by CCNL.



4.0 Recommendations Of The Honourable Justices Of The Supreme Court Of Nigeria In Suit Sc./69/2011.

It is on record that The Honourable Justices of the Supreme Court of Nigeria recommended that if actually CCNL didn`t authorize the former Counsel to file any notice of case withdrawal, CCNL should file an application subsequently to restore the dismissed appeal when the court said and I quote,

“if you want your appeal re-listed, you will bring an application subsequently on the bases that the former appellant`s counsel was not authorized to file a notice of case withdrawal, as simple as that.”
Per: Supreme Court of Nigeria
Suit No: sc./69/2011
Date: 5/5/2014

5.0 An Overview Of The Question Posted By Ikechukwu Bonik.

Haven explained in details the circumstances that led to the erroneous dismissal of the Appeal filed by CCNL; I consider it pertinent to critically tackle the question adduced by Ikechukwu Bonik.

Question And Answer
In view of the recent erroneous dismissal of CCNL Appeal in the Supreme Court of Nigeria by Justice Walter Samuel Nkanu Onneghen (JSC) on 5th of May, 2014, and the possible restoration of the appeal any moment from now in the apex court of the land, would the appeal start afresh in the Supreme Court of Nigeria on 7th of October, 2014?
Per: Ikechukwu Bonik
Member: Comandclem Patentees` Association, Nigeria.


From the above question, it is manifestly cleared that Ikechukwu Bonik tenaciously believed that the erroneously dismissed Appeal filed by CCNL has one hundred percent (100 %) assurance and possibility of being restored any moment the legal term of CCNL files an application to that effect.

The only area of confusion to Ikechukwu Bonik and other patentees is whether or not the Proposed Restored Appeal filed by CCNL will start afresh in the Supreme Court of Nigeria on 7th of October, 2014, the date specifically set aside for the hearing of the cross appeal filed by Mobil Producing Nigeria Unlimited.

6.0 The Procedural Approach to the Restoration Of A Dismissed Appeal.

For your information, it is not a big deal to dismiss an appeal in error because of the fact that such an appeal has high potential of being restored the moment an application is forwarded to the Supreme Court Of Nigeria in that regard.
The above truism is supported by the rules of the Supreme Court Of Nigeria, 1985 (as amended), order 8, rule 8 (4) and I quote.

“An Appellant whose appeal has been dismissed under this rule may apply by notice of motion that his appeal be restored. Any such application may be made to the Court and the Court may, where exceptional circumstances have been shown, cause such appeal to be restored upon such terms as it may think fit.”
 

The exceptional circumstances the Legal Team of CCNL is expected to exhibit before the Honourable Justices of the Supreme Court of Nigeria to actualize the restoration of the erroneously dismissed appeal are stated below.

(1) No evidence before the court to show that Mobil Oil was served a copy of the fake notice of case withdrawal. (Order 8, Rule 6 (1) Of The Supreme Court Rule, 1985 As Amended).

(2) No evidence before the court to show that both CCNL and Mobil Oil consented to withdraw the appeal from the Supreme Court of Nigeria. . (Order 8, Rule 6 (4) Of The Supreme Court Rule, 1985 As Amended).

(3) Haven ruled on the appeal four (4) times in the past without the alleged/fake notice of case withdrawal in the case file, the apex court is left with no option than to restore the erroneously dismissed appeal in the interest of justice.


7.0 Would The Proposed Restored Suit Starts Afresh In The Supreme Court Of Nigeria On 7th Of October, 2014?

In the eye of the law, a restored appeal cannot start afresh before the honourable justices of any court of competent jurisdiction. A restored appeal will be brought back to his previous proceeding position before dismissal. A restored appeal is not treated as a new case because treating it as such will amount to rendering the past orders/pronouncements of the court mere academic exercise.

The above opinion is corroborated by the judicial pronouncement of Honourable Justice Aboki (JCA) in the case of D.Y.S Trocca Valsesia & Co versus Osaghae 2008 ALL FWLR Pt. 413 when the court said and I quote.

“Restore is defined as re-establishing, renew, bring back into use, replace, put back, bring to former place or condition. Restoring an appeal cannot catapult such an appeal to the statute of being entered or listed. Thus, to restore a dismissed appeal is to bring back the dismissed appeal.”

Per: Honourable Justice Aboki (JCA)
Case: D.Y.S Trocca Valsesia & Co versus Osaghae 2008 ALL FWLR Pt. 413

8.0 Conclusion
On 7th of October, 2014, the date specifically set aside for the hearing of the Cross Appeal filed by Mobil Producing Nigeria Unlimited, the Honourable Justices Of The Supreme Court of Nigeria will not treat the proposed restored appeal filed by CCNL as a new appeal or start afresh to entertain the appeal in question. But the court will bring the appeal in question back to its previous position or condition before dismissal.

It is on record that The Legal Team Of CCNL applied for accelerated hearing of the case on 14th of October, 2013 in the Supreme Court of Nigeria. The said application was entertained by the Supreme Court of Nigeria on 30th of October, 2013, in the inner chamber of the apex court of the land, and the case subsequently adjourned to 5th of May, 2014 before the appeal was dismissed in error by Honourable Justice Walter Nkanu Samuel Onnoghem (JSC) on 5th of May, 2014.

In one word, the appeal in question will assume the status of accelerated hearing as adjudicated upon by the Supreme Court of Nigeria on 30th of October, 2013 after restoration of the appeal any moment from now.

Name: Yusuf Nurudeen (B. Sc, AAT, ACA)
Head Office Address:
CCNL Zonal Headquarters,
Position: CCNL Marketing Manager
Number 4, Ogudu Road,
Ojota,
Lagos State.
Ondo State Office:
Position: CCNL Ondo State Manager
No 32. Oba-Adesida Road,
Opposite Airtel Office,
S.O. Area,
Akure.
Mobil Number: +2347032522248

CCNL Twitter Handle: www.twitter.com/Comandlem_Nig
CCNL Facebook Name: Comandclem Patentees
CCNL Corporate Facebook Address: www.facebook.com/ComandclemNigeriaLimited
CCNL Corporate Website: www.comandclemonline.com
CCNL Forum: www.comandclemonline.com/forum/index.php?
Facebook Publication Page: www.facebook.com/PatenteesOnlineNewsPaper


You could Be Making 780USD Weekly, it depends on you

view details at http://sarahfreeman11.wix.com/workathome
Let's start by creating two e-currency accounts, Perfect money and Egopay.
*To Create a Perfect Money its free go to or www.perfectmoney.com
*To create a egopay Account its free go to www.egopay.com

 
Let us have to fund your egopay account  with $20 (example)


To fund or Withdraw money from your egopay account go to  https://www.egopay.com/exchange   or google  any reliable exchanger  close to you like www.Naira4dollar.com
and a host of others.
Note(i)   

it is the USD($) account number example  (U1234567)  in the perfect money account you will use while making exchange, and not the ID itself.
(ii), it is the email  address you used to open Egopay, or pecunix account that is your account ID,

 BEGIN TO EARN.

(1). To earn from currency exchange Go to  www.rapidgoldex.com and exchange(EXAMPLE) $50 from your Egopay account to Perfect money account.Note @ rapidgoldex  $1 Egopay->$1.28 perfect money,      so $50 Egopay -> $64 Perfect money USD.

Next step  :  you go to https://magneticexchange.com/   or   https://xchanger.org/   and     re-exchange $64 Perfect money--->$61.32 Egopay
that means   you have made a profit of $11.32 to your Egopay account with your $50 PM.
your Egopay account balance is now $61.32

(2). Repeat the exchange process from egopay---->Perfect money, and perfect money--->Egopay continuously because the more you exchange
between perfect money and  Pecunix ,, the more you earn.

10 times of exchange or about one hour the clear profit will be more than $100 and above depending on your Capital.

You can always increase your capital, because the more money you exchange the faster u make your cash. I can make up to 800 USD per day. doing up to 25 exchange per hour. But there is also no harm in starting small.
To Withdraw money from your Egopay  account go to www.Naira4dollar.com
or   www.standardgoldng.com, or any reliable one close to you.
and sell to them, they will credit your local bank account within few hour.

"The only place where success comes before work is the Dictionary."
Disclaimer:
*This blog is just for illustration purpose the amount you see there can be varied depending on  your ability and capability
*How much money you make depends on your capital and the amount of time you put into this venture.
 

GOOD LUCK

CCNL To File Restoration Application 
As The Supreme Court Of Nigeria
Suspends Strikes

Pieces of information at the disposal of Anti-Corrosive Vanguard show clearly that there are strong indications that the Leading Legal Counsel of Comandclem Nigeria Limited, Rev. Jesse Daniels Onuigbo ESQ, has finally concluded all the outstanding technical issues necessary to file a Restoration Application in the Supreme Court of Nigeria.

This progress report was made known to our correspondent during an interview with the Leading Legal Team of Comandclem Nigeria Limited, Rev. Jesse Daniels Onuigbo ESQ. Below is the interview, happy reading.



CCNL Marketing Manager Asked A Question as follows.
Now that the strike embarked upon by the administrative staff in the Supreme Court of Nigeria has been suspended, what are the positive steps taken by the Legal Department of CCNL to ensure that necessary application is filed on this case?

Rev. Jesse Daniels Onuigbo ESQ replied as follows
The recently suspended strike embarked upon by the Judiciary Staff Union of Nigeria delayed the filing of an application to restore our dismissed appeal in the Supreme Court of Nigeria. We have dotted our I`s and crossed our T`s in the application. 


The Honourable Justices of the Supreme Court of Nigeria will favourably consider our application in the interest of justice so that both the Cross Appeal filed by Mobil Oil, and our Appeal can be entertained together of 7th of October, 2014 because both appeals are co-join twice. You cannot hear one in isolation of another.



CCNL Marketing Manager Asked A Question as follows.
This case is fourteen (14) years old. When would it come to an end?


Rev. Jesse Daniels Onuigbo ESQ replied as follows
It is quit unfortunate. Mobil Producing Nigeria Unlimited has adopted all forms of delay strategies to frustrate the speedy determination of this appeal. Mobil Oil capitalized on loop holes in our laws to unnecessarily delay the case.

For example, Dr. Eyimofe Atake filed A Cross Appeal dated 20th of May, 2012 claiming that Mobil Oil invented Anti-Corrosive Special Paint for QIT QAD RP:13522. I filed a Cross Respondent Brief on 13th of May, 2013.

Mobil Oil supposed to have filed a Cross Appellant Reply Brief as far back as 10th of June, 2013, but deliberately delayed for two hundred and eighteen (218) days, and only served us twenty-four hours (24) to the hearing of the appeal on 5th of May, 2014. And paid a penalty of =N=2,270:00 for filing late. This oil giant capitalized on the loop holes in our laws to frustrate the speedy determination of the case.

This case will come to an end very soon because all the necessary motions /replies have been filed by parties. CCNL filed Appellants ` Brief of Argument and Mobil Oil has replied by filing a Respondent`s Brief Of Argument, and I have responded to it by filing Appellants` Reply Brief On Point Of Law.

Conversely, Mobil Oil filed A Cross Appeal and I filed A Cross Respondents` Brief to react to it. Mobil Oil has reacted to it by filing a Cross Appellant`s Reply Brief.

All the necessary motions/replies are available for the apex court of the land to use as tools to deliver judgment on this appeal. I am sure by the special grace of Almighty God, the cross appeal will be dismissed while CCNL`s Appeal will succeed.

To be continued……………………………………………..

Name: Yusuf Nurudeen (B. Sc, AAT, ACA)
Head Office Address:
CCNL Zonal Headquarters,
Position: CCNL Marketing Manager
Number 4, Ogudu Road,
Ojota, 
Lagos State.
Ondo State Office:
Position: CCNL Ondo State Manager
No 32. Oba-Adesida Road,
Opposite Airtel Office,
S.O. Area,
Akure.
Mobil Number: +2347032522248
CCNL Twitter Handle: www.twitter.com/Comandlem_Nig
CCNL Facebook Name: Comandclem Patentees
CCNL Corporate Facebook Address: www.facebook.com/comandclemnigerialimited
CCNL Corporate Website: www.comandclemonline.com
CCNL Forum: www.comandclemonline.com/forum/index.php?

RSS

Forum Categories

© 2019   Created by Vanguard Media Ltd.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service