By Ologeh Joseph Chibu
Mr Martins Orte, alias VeryDarkMan has been fined the sum of N500m for his false claims against prominent Nigerian lawyer, Mr Femi Falana, (SAN).
A Lagos High Court sitting in Ikeja also ordered Otse to delete derogatory contents against Falana, SAN, from all his social web.
Giving the order, Justice M. Dawodu in an ex-parte application filed by Falana who sought preemptive order to restrai VeryDarkMan from promoting is false media claims.
With the ruling, Mr Otse may serve as the scape goat for emergency social media users who seek publicity by trampling on the rights of others.
The suspect had published an audio which he claimed was that of Mr Idris Okunneye in which Falana was linked to unfounded reports of misdeeds.
Falana had sued VeryDarkman for his malicious report while Okunneye had dismissed the audio as a red herring.
Justice Dawodu ordered VeryDarkMan, his cohorts to remove all contents he loaded on the social media that impugn on Falana’s character.
VeryDarkMan from stopped further promoting any defamatory content against Falana.
Justice Dawodu gave the order on Monday, pending the time Mr Otse obeys the pre-action protocol of the court.
Falana had sought “An order of interim/pre-emptive remedy by this court restraining the defendant, his agents, privies, and/or anyone from further circulating or publishing any defamatory videos/comments about the applicant, and to remove the defamatory videos/comments published on September 24, 2024, from all his online social media handles/pages, pending compliance with the pre-action protocol of this court.
He also sought “An order granting leave to the applicant to serve the pre-action bundles, originating processes and all other court processes between parties herein on the defendant by substituted means through his lawyer, Deji Adeyanju of Deji Adeyanju & Partners at Terrace Block D4, White Diamond Estate, Makuru Street, Off Embu Street, Off Aminu, Wuse II, Abuja.”
Justice Dawodu said “The applicant has a legal right to be protected from being defamed by the actions of the defendant. Whether this action will succeed can only be determined during the hearing of the matter.
He said there is no doubt that the applicant has a legal right not to be defamed and has proved the possible existence of a breach of the same through the depositions in his affidavit.
“From the affidavit evidence and the documents in support thereof, it is clear that there are substantial issues to be tried in this matter; the balance of convenience seems to be in favor of the applicant, and damages might not be adequate compensation, especially moreso that the defendant might not be in good financial standing to compensate the applicant if the court finds in his favor.
“From the foregoing, this court finds that the applicant has satisfied the conditions stated in Adeleke v. Lawal (supra).
“The defendant, his agents, and privies are hereby restrained from further releasing, publishing, or circulating any defamatory videos/comments about the applicant and to bring down the defamatory video/comments about the Applicant published on September 24, 2024, on all his online social media handles/pages pending compliance with the pre-action protocol of this court.
“Leave is hereby granted to the applicant to serve the pre-action bundles, originating processes, and all other court processes between parties herein on the defendant by substituted means through his lawyer, Deji Adeyanju
“The applicant must file and serve the pre-action bundles, originating processes, and other accompanying processes on the defendant within 14 days from today. The order in 1 above shall lapse after 21 days from today,” the court ruled