The Court of Appeal in Abuja on Saturday dismissed two separate applications that were brought by All progressives Congress APC and People’s Democratic Party (PDP) praying it to review its own judgment .
Rather the appellate Court dismissed the applications brought by Joe Odey Agi of the All Progressive Congress APC and Stephen Adi Odey of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) with a punitive cost of N2million and N3million respectively for being an abuse.
The money awarded is to be paid to the Peoples Democratic Party PDP and its candidate Mr Agom Jarigbe whose election was challenged in the abused court processes that was filed in bad faith.
Agi and Odey had in their applications requested the Court of Appeal to review its own judgment of July 30, that affirmed Jarigbe Ago Jarigbe as candidate of the Peoples Democratic party and duly elected Senator representing Cross River North Senatorial District in the bye – election held on December 5, 2020.
The applicants have asked the Court to nullify Jarigbe’s election on the ground that the July 30 judgment in Calabar violated section 285 of the 1999 constitution having been done without jurisdiction.
They also claimed among others that Agom Jarigbe who was returned as winner of the bye-election did not participate in all the stages of the election as required by law.
In her ruling , the President of the Court of Appeal, Justice Monica Domgbem-Mensen who led a five memember panel said both applications were frivolous and lacked merit.
Justice Domgbem-Mensen further ruled that the two appellants brought their applications in bad faith as It constituted a dangerous invitation to the court to set a bad precedent.
Citing section 246 of the 1999 constitution, to buttress this point , the Court of Appeal ruled that its judgment once delivered diligently cannot be set aside except where such judgment is fundamentally defective.
In the instant application, the Court of Appeal President stated that both APC and Agi failed to show fundamental defective aspects in the judgment they challenged .
She further ruled that the two applicants did not show the court any aspects of the law that empowered it to review its own judgment and set aside its own judgment other than where clerical typographical errors are discovered.
The court therefore held that the application is a gross abuse of court process, malicious and brought in bad faith to over reach the court.
“In totality, the applications by the appellants is worthy of nothing but dismissal and I hereby dismiss It for want of merit,” she said.
.