The Lagos High Court, located in Ikeja, has adjorned the defamation lawsuit initiated by renowned human rights attorney, Femi Falana, SAN, alongside his son, Folarin, widely recognized as Falz, against social media personality, Martins Otse, also known as VeryDarkMan, VDM, to be heard on February 19.
The presiding justice, Justice Matthias Dawodu, postponed the proceedings following the submission of a preliminary objection by VDM’s counsel, Marvin Omorogbe, which questioned the court’s jurisdiction over the matter as well as the legitimacy of the legal action taken by the Falanas.
It has been reported that while the litigants were not present in court, their respective legal representatives attended the session.
Omorogbe informed the court that he had received a counter affidavit submitted by the Falanas in response to his objection and requested additional time to formulate a reply.
CREEBHILLS has reported that the case originated from a video uploaded by VeryDarkMan, in which he accused Femi Falana and his son of receiving N10 million from the prominent individual Bobrisky to obstruct the course of justice.
The Falanas are pursuing N500 million each in damages, asserting that the video contained defamatory remarks that adversely affected their reputations.
In response, Justice Dawodu had previously mandated on October 14, 2024, that VDM remove the video, concurrently issuing a restraining order against any further defamatory publications.
Furthermore, the Falanas are seeking a public apology from VDM, to be disseminated via his social media platforms and published in a national newspaper.
VDM’s legal team contended that the court lacks jurisdiction over the case, given that the defendant primarily resides and operates in Abuja, where the alleged defamatory content was shared.
They further argued that the Falanas filed the lawsuit in Lagos in an effort to engage in “forum shopping” for a more favorable ruling.
According to the Falanas, VDM’s actions, predicated on unsubstantiated claims and malicious intent, have inflicted significant harm on their public image, and they continue to endure reputational damage as the video remains accessible online.
