The fine levied against well-known Nigerian on-air personality Ifedayo Olarinde, popularly known as Daddy Freeze, for adultery has been upheld by the Court of Appeal in Port Harcourt.
A High Court sitting in Port Harcourt, Rivers State, had on February 18, 2021, ordered Daddy Freeze to pay the sum of N5m for committing adultery with one Benedicta Elechi.
He was directed to give the money to Elechi’s spouse, Paul Odekina, at the time the adulterous act was carried out.
“The sum of N5,000,000 is awarded against Ifedayo Olarinde (the 2nd Cross Respondent to the Cross Petition) as damages for depriving the Cross Petitioner of the amiable consort of his wife (Petitioner/1st Cross Respondent) and for injury suffered as a result of his adultery with the Petitioner/Cross Respondent,
The court also dissolved the marriage contracted between Paul and Benedicta due to her adulterous act with Daddy Freeze.
Daddy Freeze filed an appeal with the appeals court because he was unhappy with the ruling made by the High Court.
Daddy Freeze’s main grounds of appeal were that Odekina did not attempt to serve him personally before applying for substituted service, which violates Order 7 Rule 2 of the Rules of the Trial Court.
Additionally, he held that the alleged substituted method of service—by courier, as demonstrated by the affidavit of service—was ineffective and that the failure to serve violates the two fundamental tenets of the natural justice principle.
In the Certified True Copy of the judgment, dated June 26, 2024, and obtained by our correspondent on Friday, the three-man panel of Justice Abubakar Talba, Danlami Senchi, and Hannatu Balogun dismissed Daddy Freeze’s appeal for lack of merit.
The court ruled that if the appellant wanted to overturn the trial court’s judgment due to non-service, he should have filed a counter-affidavit against the affidavit of service and then sought to set aside the trial court’s judgment.
It partly read, “Affidavit evidence can only be countered by a Counter Affidavit. As a result, I thought the appellant’s method was outside the bounds of our case law.
“Where the Appellant wants the judgment of the trial court to be set aside for non-service, he ought to have approached the trial court by filing a Counter affidavit against the affidavit of service he seeks to set aside and consequently set aside the judgment of the trial court. Thus, as it is in the instant appeal there is nothing filed by the Appellant to counter the affidavit of service of the Process Server filed in
“Hence, therefore I resolved the sole issue for determination against the Appellant and in favour of the Respondents. The appeal therefore lacks merit and it is hereby dismissed
“Accordingly, the judgment of the Rivers State High Court in Suit No. PHC/403MC/2012 delivered on the 18th February 2021 by J. Akpughunum, is hereby affirmed. I make no order as to costs”.
As per the CTC ruling, N.A. Naenwi and Wilcox Abereton (SAN) represented the first and second respondents, respectively, whereas Ola Faro and Ikobah Hilton represented the appellant.
