The petitioner is a shareholder and director in the 1st respondent. The 2nd - 4th respondents purportedly removed him as a director of the 1st respondent. He alleged that his removal and the conduct of the 2nd - 4th respondents were illegal, oppressive and unfairly prejudicial.
In particular, the petitioner alleged that the 2nd - 4th respondents did not comply with the requirement of the Companies and Allied Matters Act Cap. C20 Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 2004 (“CAMA”) which provides the procedure for the issuance and length of notice of extra ordinary general meetings.
Consequently, he filed a petition at the Federal High Court, Lagos pursuant to the provisions of sections 236, 262, 310, 311 and 312 and of CAMA and section 36 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 asking the court to determine whether in view of the facts before the court and the provisions of CAMA, the affairs of the 1st respondent had been conducted in an illegal, oppressive and unfairly prejudicial manner and whether his removal as a director of the company is valid and sustainable in law.