Appeal Court in Lagos on Friday dismissed the appeal filed by the Nigeria Security and Exchange Commission, SEC, against the ruling of Justice Mohammed Idris which nullified the removal of Ndidi Okereke and ordered the Commission to pay her N500 million.
Justice Idris, had in his judgement, described Okereke-Onyiuke’s removal as reckless, hasty and done in bad faith.
The court awarded N500 million against SEC as exemplary and aggravated damages for the reckless manner Prof. Okere-Onyiuke’s right to fair hearing was violated.
Dissatisfied, SEC filed appealed and urged the court to set aside the judgment.
In its notice of appeal, SEC maintained that Okereke-Onyiuke’s sack was in exercise of its statutory powers to protect the NSE, the interest of investing public and the Nigerian economy as a whole.
But, when the appeal came up, Okereke-Onyiuke’s lawyer, Michael Akintayo urged the court to take cognisance of a notice of discontinuance filed by the appellant.
He submitted that once a notice of discontinuance had been filed the proper order was to dismiss the appeal.
In her reply, counsel to SEC, Mrs. Imaoboy, urged the court to ignore the notice of discontinuance adding that it was filed in error.
But, in a short ruling, the panel presided over by Justice U.I Ndukwe-Anyanwu (Mrs.) noted that SEC had earlier filed notice of discontinuance of the appeal, and that the appeal cannot be resuscitated.
Justice Ndukwe-Anyanwu held that there was no appeal before the court since the notice of discontinuance had entered the record of the court.
“You cannot build something on nothing, the appeal had ceased to exist before the court the moment notice of discontinuance was filed”, the court held.
The lower court had in its judgement declared the removal of Prof. Ndi Okereke-Onyiuke as irrational, hasty and did not comply with the condition precedent in removing the plaintiff.
Justice Idris had held, “It is indeed ridiculous that SEC removed the plaintiff within 24 hours, based on bad and unverified allegations, and that it is not in doubt that SEC did not comply with the condition precedent in removing the plaintiff.
“SEC acted in breach of section 308 of Investment and Securities Act (ISA) and therefore, her removal based on the section is a nullity.
“It is also important to note that the plaintiff has not attempted at any forum and in any manner whatsoever to answer those allegation on their merits.”
Okereke-Onyiuke, had in the suit, challenged the propriety of her removal by SEC, and sought to restrain the commission and its agents from treating and relating to her “as a removed DG of the NSE.”
She had said that she was through with the NSE, having tendered her resignation letter before her sack, adding that she harbours no grudge against her former employer.
She added that she was neither seeking to be reinstated nor did she intend to disrupt the on-going efforts by the interim management to re-organise, and restructure the stock market.