The Federal High Court in Abuja dismissed a lawsuit filed by businessman Abubakar Ismaila Isa Funtua, who claimed that his 43 million shares were transferred without his agreement to Emerging Markets Telecommunication Services Limited (EMTS), the operators of 9mobile.
Justice Mohammed Umar ruled in the case FHC/ABJ/CS/1971/2024 on September 24, 2025, that Isa, the lone plaintiff, lacked the locus standi (legal ability) to bring the action against the nine defendants.
The defendants in the case included Seltrix Limited, Hayatu Hassan Hadejia, Teleology Nigeria Limited, Mohammed Edewor, EMTS, the Corporate Affairs Commission (CAC), the Nigerian Communications Commission (NCC), LH Telecommunication Limited, and General Theophilus Yakubu Danjuma.
Isa filed the claim on December 27, 2024, through his attorney, Femi Atteh, SAN, seeking 11 reliefs, including a declaration that he was the beneficial owner of the disputed shares allegedly held in trust for him by Seltrix Ltd in Teleology Nigeria Ltd.
However, the third, fourth, fifth, eighth, and ninth defendants, represented by Michael Aondakaa, SAN, C.I. Okpoko, SAN, R.O. Atabo, SAN, A.T. Kohol, Esq., and C.C. Ogbonna, Esq., filed a joint preliminary objection on February 5, 2025, urging the court to dismiss the case for lack of jurisdiction and abuse of court process.
READ ALSO: Court Declares Utomi’s ‘Shadow Government’ Unconstitutional
After hearing arguments from all parties, Justice Umar supported the objection, stating that Isa failed to demonstrate any legal interest in the matter.
Justice Umar held: “I attentively reviewed the mentioned exhibit to check if the Plaintiff’s complaint is proved, and I could not find any. There was no mention of the 43,000,000 million ordinary shares held in trust for the plaintiff by the first defendant.
“In reality, the second defendant denied having any commercial interactions with the plaintiff, and the plaintiff did not dispute these facts. The aforementioned evidence do not, in any way, constitute a trust conferring locus standi on the Plaintiff. The Plaintiff produced the evidence, but none of them linked the Plaintiff to his claims, allowing him to bring an action based on the circumstances described therein.”
Furthermore, the court determined that the plaintiff failed to establish the facts he claimed and to connect his claims to the exhibits he himself offered as a result of averment in this litigation.
“I find that the Objectors have adequately countered the said exhibits in their reply on points of law in tandem with the law that failure to respond to a counter affidavit is deemed to be an admission,” the judge stated.
As a final point, the judge stated: “I resolve the issue of locus standi against the Plaintiff, and the law is that where a Plaintiff has been adjudged to lack locus standi, it does not matter what other issues have been raised for determination in the suit.”
The court noted that because the Plaintiff lacked the capacity to institute the action, there was no need to make a pronouncement on grounds two to nine (2-9) of the 3rd, 4th, 5th, 8th, and 9th Defendants’ Notice of Preliminary Objections, which included claims that the suit was statute-barred, incompetent, and that Isa was a “meddlesome interloper” seeking to disrupt EMTS’ operations.
“I therefore make an Order striking out this action due to the Plaintiff’s lack of locus standi.” The judge said, “This is the Order of this Court.”
Victor Ezeja is a passionate journalist, scholar and analyst of socioeconomic issues in Nigeria and Africa. He is skilled in energy reporting, business and economy, and holds a master's degree in Mass Communication. He can be reached via @VICTOREZEJA on X