The High Court of Lagos State, sitting in the Ikeja Judicial Division before Honourable Justice D.T. Olatokun, has dismissed in its entirety a suit filed by Sporty Internet Limited against five individuals sued for themselves and as representatives of 42 sports bet users, holding that the claimant failed to prove entitlement to any of the reliefs sought.
Judgment in the matter Suit No. ID/5719MJR/2024 was delivered on 15th November 2024, bringing to a close a closely watched legal battle between the licensed online sports betting operator and a group of its users whose accounts had been suspended over alleged fraudulent activity.
The Claimant, Sporty Internet Limited, a regulated and licensed online sports betting operator in Nigeria, approached the court via an Originating Summons filed on 1st July 2024, seeking declarations and perpetual injunctions against the Defendants Obinna George Unegbu, Uchenna Ofurum, Ifenna Moneke, Busola Olamide Aina, and Adedamola Oluwaseun Okunola.
According to the Claimant’s pleadings, in April 2024 it discovered a set of suspicious transactions on its gaming platform which allegedly violated its terms and conditions. The 42 user accounts involved, though carrying positive balances, were flagged and verified as being abusively operated and manipulated by what the Claimant described as an international cybercrime syndicate using bot technology. The accounts were subsequently suspended, and the Claimant petitioned both the National Lottery Regulatory Commission (NLRC) and the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).
The Claimant alleged that the Defendants, rather than honour EFCC’s invitation, resorted to sponsored articles and false social media narratives that damaged its reputation and endangered relationships with global partners, financiers, and investors.
The Defendants, through their counsel Kunle Bamidele, filed a 42-paragraph Counter Affidavit deposed to by Busola Olamide Aina on 5th August 2024. They maintained that:
The court framed four core issues for determination:
On Issue One, the court held that although the Claimant’s averments in paragraphs 9–13 of its affidavit related to facts typical of a defamation suit, the reliefs and facts averred showed that the suit was essentially about alleged comments and publications inimical to the Claimant’s business. This issue was resolved in favour of the Claimant.
On Issue Two, the court affirmed that the right to freedom of expression under Section 39 of the 1999 Constitution is not absolute. Citing Suleiman Shaibu & Ors v. Desmond Utomwen & Ors (2022) LPELR-58237(CA) and Omoyele Sowore v. Federal Republic of Nigeria (2022) LPELR-57439(CA), the court invoked Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes’ famous dictum that “the right to swing my fist ends where the other man’s nose begins.”
However, the court found that the Claimant had failed to establish that it acted in good faith in its own publications, observing that Exhibit A4 contained extensive statements by defence counsel Kunle Bamidele that went beyond an ordinary interview. Significantly, the court held that the Claimant’s own publication of the pre-emptive court orders online “smirks of bad faith,” invoking the equitable maxim that “he who comes to equity must come with clean hands” (citing Adejumo v. Ayantegbe (1989) 3 NWLR (Pt. 110) 417).
On Issue Three the crucial question of perpetual injunction the court held decisively that:
Relying on Alade v. Sofolarin & Ors (2015) LPELR-25008(CA) and Kaan International Development Limited v. Little Acorns Turnkey Projects Limited & Anor (2018) LPELR-45291(CA), the court held that the Claimant was not entitled to reliefs 3 and 4.
On Issue Four, the court rejected the Claimant’s prayer that both parties be compelled to await and be bound by the outcome of the EFCC/NLRC investigation. The judge reasoned that:
The court held that questions 1–3 of the Originating Summons were not in contention and represented the correct position of the law, making reliefs 1 and 2 “superfluous.” Consequently, the court concluded:“The claimant failed to prove that it is entitled to any of the reliefs sought in this suit. This suit is therefore hereby dismissed in its entirety.”
Appearances; Dr. Kemi Pinheiro, SAN led a team comprising Bolu Agbaje Akadri, Emeka Ekweozor, and Oyindamola Olowu for the Claimant, while Kunle Bamidele appeared for the Defendants.