According to the court documents obtained by SaharaReporters on the ongoing matter, the company said its chairman was “hesitant” to grant Davido the contract, having disappointed them on two previous occasions.
ADelta State High Court sitting in Effurun has struck out the application filed by Nigerian star, David Adeleke, popularly known as Davido, seeking a stay of proceedings in the N2 billion suit filed against him by Brownhill Investment Company Limited over the annual ‘Warri Again Concert’.
SaharaReporters reported in November 2023 that the firm, Brownhill Investments Company Limited, told the court that Davido earlier in the year met its chairman, Amaju Pinnick, at the Nnamdi Azikiwe International Airport in Abuja, where he (Davido) specially requested to perform at the mega event.
According to the court documents obtained by SaharaReporters on the ongoing matter, the company said its chairman was “hesitant” to grant Davido the contract, having disappointed them on two previous occasions.
The company had further told the court that the singer signed all the agreement papers after insisting that the monies must be paid in full and the performance agreement was sealed.
The agreement was dated March 30, 2023.
The company had said the singer rather went to another event slated for the same date at “Lux Nightclub, Melbourne, 373 Chapel St. South Yarra, Australia.”
SaharaReporters on November 1, 2023, reported that the claimant, represented by Kelechi Onwuegbuchulem, was demanding N2 billion in general damages from Davido and his music company, Davido Music Worldwide Limited.
Furthermore, the claimant is asking for N150 million in legal and professional expenses, as well as an extra N30 million to cover the cost of filing the lawsuit.
The defendants in the lawsuit are David Adeleke, aka Davido and his music label, Davido Music Worldwide Limited.
At the hearing in the matter on Thursday, Davido’s counsel, Mr Norrison Quakers (SAN), informed the court that there was a pending appeal and that the defendants had filed a motion for a stay of proceedings.
Quakers further informed the court that the defendants had been served with a copy of the claimant’s reply affidavit to the petition for a stay.
However, he moved to withdraw the application, claiming that the Court of Appeal had usurped control over the lower court proceedings.
However, the counsel for the claimant, Onwuegbuchulem, did not contest the application to withdraw the motion, and the court granted it accordingly.
The court upheld the claimant’s argument and held that until an order staying further proceedings is obtained from the Court of Appeal, the High Court will continue with proceedings in the case.
The court also granted the motion on notice seeking to regularise the claimant’s reply to the statement of defence and directed that Pre-Trial Conference (PTC) forms be filed within 14 days in line with the rules of the court.
The court adjourned the case to March 21, 2024, for a pre-trial conference.