A Lagos High Court sitting in Ikoyi has dismissed the N1 billion defamation suit filed by Nollywood actress, Iyabo Ojo, against fellow actress Lizzy Anjorin.
Justice Olabisi Akinlade ruled on July 17 that the suit was incompetent due to procedural errors.
Consequently, Ojo’s counsel was fined ₦500,000.
However, the claim was not struck out against Ojo personally, as the judge noted “the court would not penalise the claimant for the errors of her counsel.”
The dismissal stems from a preliminary objection by Anjorin’s lawyer, Ademola Olabiyi, who argued that the suit failed to comply with required pre-action procedures.
Notably, the Protocol Form 01 accompanying the Writ of Summons lacked the necessary signature.
In addition, the Writ itself did not follow the prescribed Form 1 format mandated by court rules.
During proceedings, Olabiyi emphasized that the Writ of Summons was not signed as required.
The court observed discrepancies between the unsigned version and the court’s copy.
This procedural oversight meant the court had no jurisdiction to hear the matter.
In response, Ojo’s counsel, Dr Olabimpe Ajegbomogun, filed a counter-affidavit and written address on June 1, 2024.
However, these efforts were unsuccessful. Ultimately, Justice Akinlade concluded that the unsigned writ undermined the suit’s validity and ordered its dismissal.
This decision marks a significant setback for Ojo, who had sought damages amounting to ₦1 billion in response to alleged defamatory comments by Anjorin.
That sought-after relief included general and aggravated damages, apologies, and publication of court judgments.
Moreover, the ruling sends a broader message about the strict enforcement of court protocols and documentation requirements.
It serves as a reminder that even high-stakes cases, especially involving famous personalities, must adhere to procedural rules.
In addition, procedural technicalities such as signatures and correct forms can make or break a lawsuit, regardless of its underlying merit.
Therefore, this outcome may prompt legal teams to pay closer attention to documentation and court rules.
Meanwhile, reactions on social media and legal circles have questioned whether the case may be refiled correctly.
Some have asked if Ojo will seek to correct the errors or explore alternative legal remedies.
The court’s strict stance here may shape how future defamation cases are handled.
