Sentences with phrase «application for adjournment»

In his ruling, Justice Abubakar Talba rejected the EFCC's application for an adjournment on the ground that the prosecution did not place sufficient materials before the court to enable it exercise its discretion in its favour.

Honeywell «s counsel, Chief Wole Olanipekun, SAN however objected to the oral application for adjournment stating that the matter for the day was the delivery of a ruling regarding the issue of cross examination of Ecobank's witness, Dr. Oba Otudeko.

Olujinmi said although he had no objection to the application for adjournment, the judge should direct the DSS to produce Dasuki in court on the next trial date.

In response, Dasuki's lawyer, Mr. Joseph Daudu (SAN), said he had no objection to the prosecutor's application for an adjournment.

This is not unconmnected to the refusal of the tribunal rufused to grant their application for adjournment.

Counsel fot the defence, Mr Kalu Onuha said he had no objection to the application for adjournment.

The presiding Judge, Justice Sulaiman Akoko, said in the absence of objection to the application for adjournment, the case would come up again for hearing on Feb. 20.

Responding, EFCC's prosecuting counsel, Mr. Sylvanus Tahir, opposed the application for adjournment.

The defence counsel, Rickey Tarfa (SAN), however opposed the application for adjournment sought by the prosecution on the ground that the prosecution did not have a time frame within which the payment would be finalised.

Counsel to Destra Investment Limited, Tochukwu Onwugbufor, SAN, supported Ikpeazu's application for adjournment.

In view of the development, Counsel to the former Minister, Mr Ahmed Raji, did not oppose to the application for adjournment.

Prosecuting counsel, Rotimi Jacobs, SAN, however, urged the court to dismiss the application for adjournment and continue with the trial on the grounds that the defence counsel has the privilege to go to the prisons for his briefing with the accused person.

In his brief ruling, Justice Abang adjourned ruling on the application for adjournment till November 3, 2017.

Having listened to the arguments of the counsels, Justice Abang noted that the application for adjournment on the basis that counsel to the defence had been changed was baseless.

Justice Abang granted the application for adjournment only on the basis of the newly filed additional proof of evidence, noting that «though justice delayed is justice denied; justice rushed is justice crushed».

However, counsel to the Economic and Financial Crimes Commision (EFCC) Mr Sylvanus Tahir opposed the application for adjournment.

But Uche would not take any of that as he vehemently opposed the application for adjournment and urged the court to proceed with the hearing of the motion.

Other defence lawyers — Messrs Felix Abiodun (who was later led by Mr. Solomon Umoh, SAN, before the court adjourned), O.I Arase and A.O Ayodele — also said they had no objection to the application for adjournment.

As trial neared the Plaintiff brought an application for an adjournment and this was granted in order to give the Plaintiff time to gather appropriate medico - legal evidence.

The applications for an adjournment and a publication ban both require the exercise of judicial discretion to consider competing interests.

In this case affidavit evidence is necessary to determine the defendant's applications for an adjournment and a publication ban.