Court dismisses suit against ex-Supreme Court justice,

From Godwin Tsa, Abuja

A retired Justice of the Supreme Court, Justice James Ogebe, alongside his co-defendants, has secured a legal victory following the dismissal of a suit filed against them by Isaac Ochenjele over the ownership of Livingstone Academy, located on Anmoda Road, Oglewu, in Ohinmi Local Government Area of Benue State.

Other defendants in the suit include Abu Isah Noah, Alex Edeoja, Ejelekwu Ochinta, and Ogah Idoga.

The plaintiffs—Isaac Ochenjele, Mrs Deborah Durojaiye, Mercy Ochejele, and Livingstone Academy Anmoda Oglewu Limited—had approached the court seeking a declaration that they are the rightful beneficial owners of the school. They also urged the court to affirm their authority over the institution and restrain the defendants from further interference with its operations.

However, in his judgment, Justice A. I. Ityonyiman of the Benue State High Court dismissed the suit, holding that the plaintiffs failed to provide sufficient arguments and credible evidence to substantiate their claims to ownership.

Delivering the ruling, the court carefully examined the issue of locus standi, particularly concerning the fourth plaintiff, and held that it lacked the legal capacity to institute and maintain the action.

The judge noted that the fourth plaintiff, a corporate entity, was incorporated in 2022—two years after the death of late Pastor Samuel Ochenjele, from whom the plaintiffs purportedly derived their claim.

“I have carefully considered the arguments proffered by the parties. Only a party with a substantiated legal right has the authority to seek a remedy for the breach or injury to that legal right,” the court held.

The court further ruled that the fourth plaintiff failed to establish any legal right in its pleadings and evidence that would entitle it to seek declaratory and injunctive reliefs.

Justice Ityonyiman also observed that the plaintiffs failed to demonstrate any direct link between the corporate entity and the original ownership of the school, thereby weakening their claim.

In addition, the court held that the school, being one of the services rendered by the fourth plaintiff, cannot be equated with the legal personality of the company itself.

The plaintiffs had also alleged that the defendants unlawfully broke into the school premises on September 9, 2024, took over its operations, changed locks, and collected school fees.

However, the court found that the claims were not sufficiently proven and consequently dismissed the suit in its entirety.