THIS IS REFLECTIONS, our weekly roundup of events in the legal and technology sector, covering various topics and interesting learning points for today’s professionals. If you couldn’t make an event, don’t worry, we probably made it and have all the juicy scoop for your reading pleasure and learning.

Do you have an upcoming event you would like us to know about or attend? OR do you know of one you would like to read about? Send an email to us HERE.





The opening Address was given by Linda Bonyo. She started on a note of appreciation to all those who supported the law tech festival last year. She also emphasized the importance of access to social media and the internet by governmental bodies. She noted that there should be unrestrained access to the internet rather than the undemocratic approach of restraining access to the internet and social media. She welcomed all to the conference and introduced a speaker from Amnesty International who gave the reasons for their joining the conference and also welcomed the participants. Another speaker Elsy Sainna from ICJ Kenya also gave her support for the festival. Other speakers also joined in to lend their support to the festival.


Druid Caullychurn-Madhub (Data Commissioner, Mauritis) on “Data Protection

She stated that beyond making laws to regulate data in Africa, there is a need for us to take data protection more seriously in order to become inclusive in the global digital protection market.

Mr Andrew Rugege: He lamented the accessibility to the internet through mobile phones and also that internet accessibility was not affordable. He estimated that Africa needs 4 billion dollars to connect the unconnected. He emphasized the need for lawyers to translate policy to laws.

Joe Mucheru (Cabinet Secretary, Ministry of ICT Kenya):

With a population of over one billion, growth in ICT is non-negotiable. Government must ensure growth by allowing an enabling environment and growth in infrastructure. He also stated that digital transformation will lead to improvement in the lives of people.

Ben Roberts (Chief Technology and Innovation Officer Liquid Intelligent Technologies speaking on the state of digital infrastructure policy in Africa stated that access to digital information begins with an understanding of basic digital skills which includes the ability to browse the internet. He stated that the academic institution should be futuristic in their approach by training their students to be competent at handling jobs that were not available five years ago.


Access to justice is important in our daily lives. The pandemic slowed down access to justice. Justice delayed is justice denied. How can Africa have access to justice in the pandemic era? Prof Kakooza helped in preferring solutions to these questions and many more. The developed world before the pandemic era had already been moving in the direction of using online and electronic means to provide access to justice which was not so in Africa. But when the pandemic commenced, the Courts in Africa gradually began to progress slowly in the direction. Judges were able to come up with their judgments very quickly as a result to shift to electronic access to justice. Speedy administration of justice thus is one of the merits of this shift.

Barriers of Access to Justice during Pandemic

Huge Digital Divide: use of electronic means by those who want to access justice is not all-inclusive because not everyone can afford the cost. This has restrained access to justice. In Uganda for instance the cost of data is the highest there than in any other country.

Lack of Digital Skills: the lack of capacity and the minimum understanding of the workings of the electronic app through which justice can be accessed is a factor that hinders E-access to justice.  Therefore, there is a need for training and retraining of judicial officers for which all stakeholders should participate.

The suggestion of Prof. KAKOOZA was to the effect that the taxing of payments for data should be reduced so that access to justice can be promoted.


He started off by stating that there is a lack of spectrum to drive the use of 5G, harmonize spectrum cost and its affordability. Data integrity and security is a huge concern when it comes to the deployment of the 5G technology.

He thereafter delved into a discussion around Spectrum Policy.

Policy Engines

Radio transmitters are forms of regulated technology. A major intent of radio regulatory rules is to reduce or avoid interference among users. Currently, rules regarding transmission and reception are enumerated in spectrum policy as produced by various spectrum authorities (usually in high-level, natural language). Regulators insist that even a CR adhere to spectrum policies. To further complicate matters, a CR may be expected to operate within different geopolitical regions and under different regulatory authorities with different rules. Therefore, cognitive radios must be able to dynamically update policy and select an appropriate policy as a function of the situation.

Spectrum policies relevant to a given radio may vary in several ways:

1. Policies may vary in time (e.g., time of day, date, and even regulations changing from time to time).

2. Policies may vary in space (e.g., radio and user traveling from one policy regulatory domain to another).

3. A spectrum owner/leaser may impose policies that are more stringent than those imposed by a regulatory authority.

4. The spectrum access privileges of the radio may change in response to a change in radio users.

5. Additional policies may be imposed by hardware and software developers.

As a result, the number of different policy sets that apply to various modes and environments grows in a combinatorial fashion. It is impractical to hard-code discrete policy sets into radios to cover every case of interest. The accreditation of each discrete policy set is a major challenge. SDRs, for example, would require the maintenance of downloadable copies of software implementations of each policy set for every radio platform of interest. This is a configuration management problem.

A scalable expression and enforcement of policy are required. The complexity of policy conformance accreditation for cognitive radios and the desire for dynamic policy leads to the conclusion that CRs must be able to read and interpret policy. Therefore, an accredited (endorsed by an international standards body) language framework is needed to express policy. For example, if an established policy rule is constructed in the presence of other rules, the union of all policies is applicable. This enables hierarchal policies and policy by exception. The policy engine must be able to constrain behavior according to the intent of the machine-readable policy. An inference capability is needed to interpret multiple rules simultaneously.

In the case of spectrum subleasing, policies must be delegated from the lessor to the lessee, and a machine-readable policy may be delegated. When a CR crosses a regulatory boundary, the appropriate policy must be enabled. Policies may also be used by the system in a control function.

The policy should use standard tools and languages because the policy engine must be able to perform automatic interpretation to achieve the goals of cognitive radio applications. Policies may be written by regulatory agencies or by third parties and approved by regulators, but in all cases, the policy is a legal or contractual operating requirement and provability in the policy interpretation engine is needed for certification.

Federal Communications Commission

The FCC is the US regulatory body for the RF spectrum as per the US Communications Act. The FCC performs numerous studies on both RF spectrum needs and technical issues such as interference. In 2002, the FCC chartered a forward-looking study to investigate the changes occurring in technology and to recommend how the FCC should develop and implement spectrum policy; more specifically, the intent of the study was to “identify and evaluate changes in spectrum policy that will increase the public benefits derived from the use of radio spectrum. The creation of the Spectrum Policy Task Force initiated the first-ever comprehensive and systematic review of spectrum policy at the FCC [15]. A primary goal was to move from a reactive spectrum management model to one more in line with a proactive spectrum policy. The SPTF noted that technological advances, specifically in software-defined and cognitive radio, are enabling both the need to change spectrum policy and the capacity to look at different paradigms to implement spectrum policy.

The SPTF concluded that technology improvements have shown that the capacity is limited by the regulatory means used to access the RF spectrum. That is, access, not technical efficiency, is the limiting factor for using the spectrum. SDR and CR technology enable accessing the spectrum in multiple dimensions, such as time, frequency, bandwidth, and power.

Traditional spectrum management techniques use models and measurements to predict the interaction between different radio transmitters and receivers. Therefore, operational parameters such as transmission power, out-of-band emission, and the size of guard bands are selected to ensure interference-free interoperation of devices. The technological advances in interference rejection and digital coding will require changes to these parameters if spectrum management is to keep pace with technology. Without those changes, the operational parameters will be too conservative and thus limit the capacity to use the spectrum efficiently. Additionally, the ability to monitor the RF environment and dynamically alter radio operation makes the traditional predictive interaction model of management obsolete.

Because operational values can change with technology as well as be modified in situ, spectrum management will need to change. The current method of explicitly regulating transmission characteristics to prevent interference will need to move to a rights and responsibilities model in which interference is explicitly defined and the operational parameters must be set by the device accessing the spectrum to be within the interference limits.

National Spectrum Policy – Key Objectives

1. Ensure a level playing field: Prevent spectrum hoarding.

2. Harmonize international and regional practices and standards

– Reflect regional and international technical and security standards in national arrangements;

– Encourage spectrum harmonization for broadband wireless access that could generate economies of scale in the production and manufacture of equipment and network infrastructure;

– Ensure inter-operability for global roaming through promoting Open, interoperable, non-discriminatory and demand-driven standards;

– Implement policies and allocation that are consistent with the region a, and global best practices and standards.

– Establish coordination agreements with neighbours, either on a bilateral or multilateral basis, to hasten licensing and facilitate network planning.

3.Adopt a broad approach to promote broadband access.

– Introduce supporting regulatory measures such as competitive safeguards, open access to infrastructure, universal access/service incentives, promotion of supply and demand, licensing, roll-out obligations and market entry measures, data security and users’ rights:

– Lower or remove import duties on broadband wireless access equipment;

-Support the development of backbone and distribution networks.

4. Ensure Affordability: Set reasonable spectrum fees for wireless broadband technologies.

5. Optimize spectrum availability on a timely basis.

– Facilitate effective and timely access to spectrum and equipment authorization to facilitate the deployment and interoperability of infrastructure for wireless broadband networks;

– Make all available spectrum bands for the offer, subject to overall national ICT master-plans, in an economically efficient manner;

– Issue special research or test authorizations to promote the development of innovative wireless technologies,

6. Manage Spectrum efficiently

Allocate spectrum in an economically efficient manner, and relying on market forces, economic incentives and technical innovations;

– Promote advanced spectrum efficient technologies that allow co-existence with other radio communications services, using interference mitigation techniques, for example, dynamic frequency selection;

– Provide swift and effective enforcement of spectrum management policies and regulations.


The conference was rich and resourceful as diverse resource people lend their respective opinions on the subject matter of discuss. The Host concluded by appreciating every participant and urged everyone to endeavour to participate on the 2nd day.



Date: July 16th, 2021

Time: 12pm


The webinar started at exactly 12pm. The Moderator introduced himself as OluwaseunAyansola (Associate Aluko&Oyebode) and also introduced FehintoluOlaogun (CEO & Co-Founder, Credpal) as the speaker.


The webinar was organized in form of an open chat room where the moderator and participants ask questions and got direct answers from the speaker; FehintoluOlaogun (CEO &Co-Founder, Credpal).

The webinar was based solely on the emergence of digital loans, how to access loans, the challenges most businesses/individuals face in accessing loans, its prospects and the economic outlook on businesses, entrepreneurs and loan agencies.

About the speaker

FehintoluOlaogun is a CEO & Co-Founder of Credpal.

Credpal is a tech company/innovative that allows businesses and individuals to buy anything and pay for it in installments across online and offline merchants by providing them with instant access to credit at the point of check out.

The speaker being the CEO of Credpal spoke about some of the challenges faced in raising funds and some of the things to look out for while raising funds as business owners/individuals.

He highlighted some useful tips for raising funds as

  • Build on MVP (Minimum Viable Product).
  • Have a lot of perseverance.
  • Focus is highly need. (Don’t look at the past just focus)
  • Start small and keep building.
  • A combination of process builds up to perform an action.
  • Also having the right mentor.
  • Have a community that support your dreams.

He also advised that as a founder trying to raise funds, it is important to be deliberate in presenting solutions to investors and would also need to over-prepare as no amount of preparation is enough.


It was a fantastic session and an interactive one as most participants were able to get direct answers to their questions.



Host: ChidinmaAgu

Guest Speakers:

Doctor OkiemuteAkpomudje SAN

Mrs. Mary Adeyemo


The webinar started at 1:00 pm with the welcoming of guests by the host, MrsChidinmaAgu. In her welcome address, she gave a brief introduction to the High Court Civil Procedure Rules of Lagos State. She then introduced the guest speakers, Doctor OkiemuteAkpomudje SAN, and Mrs. Mary Adeyemo. She then handed over to Doctor OkiemuteAkpomudje SAN to give a brief analysis of the High Court Civil Procedure Rules of Lagos State, 2019.


The main session began with Doctor OkiemuteAkpomudje SAN giving an introduction to the High Court Civil Procedure Rules of Lagos State. He stated that the High Court Civil Procedure Rules of Lagos State 2019, took effect on the 31st day of January 2019. He also stated that the new rules replaced the High Court of Lagos State Civil Procedure Rules 2012. He further stated that the new rules introduced new provisions and amended some provisions of the previous rules. He made it known that the major difference between both rules is that the new rules brought about the speedy dispensation of justice.

Doctor OkiemuteAkpomudje SAN, continued further by stating the objectives of the 2019 rules which are currently overriding the provisions of the 2012 rules. He stated that the rules contained in Order 2 have the following objectives.

  1. It is aimed at ensuring fair dealings in all court proceedings, attaining efficiency through the allocation of time and resources of the court in adjudication of civil matters.
  2. It prescribes the mandatory use of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR), where the court considers it appropriate.
  3. It encourages parties to attempt to settle disputes.
  4. It ensures fixing of timetables and ensures that the case progresses smoothly.

He went on further, emphasizing on the mode of service of originating processes by email which has been made possible by the new rules as provided in Order 9 Rule 5(1). He however stated that the judge must first be satisfied that prompt personal service cannot be effected. After which, such party concerned may make an application for an order for substituted service which may include service by email. He also stated that under the new rules, by virtue of Order 5 Rule 1(3) and Order 5 Rule 5(4), all prescribed documents must be accompanied by a writ of a summons and Originating summons. Failure to do so will nullify such an action.

He also noted the fact that under the new rules, by virtue of Order 28, there are certain cases that are considered more suitable for Alternative Dispute Resolution under appropriate rules of court. He further went on explaining the doctrine of diligent prosecution provided by the new rules by virtue of Order 34, which states that all parties in a matter must ensure diligent prosecution of their cases. By this section, a judge may, upon application or suo moto strike out a matter which is considered as not being diligently prosecuted. Also, he stated that if no proceeding is held or if no application is filed in a case for a period of 12 months, the Court shall strike out the case.

He continued further, stating that there is a notable increase in the default fee under the new rules. This is by virtue of Order 48 Rule 4, which makes provisions as such; that the judge may extend the time for doing any act in a proceeding, provided that any party who defaults in performing such act within the specified time shall pay the court a fee of one thousand nairas for each day of default. He also made mention of the new prescriptions for a written address under the new rules. He stated that by virtue of Order 35 Rule 3(3), the prescribed number of pages for a written address is 20 pages with a reply on a point of law not exceeding 5 pages. An application can however be made to the court to file more pages more than the prescribed number of pages.

He further stated that by virtue of Order 11 Rule 5 of the new rules, if a defendant files a late appearance after the time prescribed in the originating process, he shall pay to the court, a fee of one thousand nairas for each day of default. Also, in any situation of computation of time, where a required act is to be done within a period which does not exceed six days, Saturdays and holidays shall be left out of an account during this computation of time. He then gave some other noteworthy provisions of the new rules which include;

  1. The new rules gives 14 days after the close of pleadings for parties to define and file issues. This is by virtue of Order 30 Rule 1(1).
  2. There is a provision for the indorsement of addresses by the claimant or a legal practitioner. This is by virtue of Order 6 Rule 6.
  3. It also makes provisions for fast track procedures. This is by virtue of Order 59.

He then came to a conclusion by highlighting some issues regarding the new rules. They include;

  1. No provisions for affidavit of service of originating processes.
  2. There is no provision as to how to prove service by email. Also, is service by email applicable to all court processes?
  3. The issue of nullification of suits for lack of compliance by virtue of Order 5 Rule 2.
  4. The new prescribed default fees may deny access to pro bono cases by clients, especially when there is an already existing default.
  5. Mandatory ADR prescribed by the courts may be infringing on the parties right of access to a court of justice.

MrsChidinmaAgu then thanked Doctor Okiemute Akpomudje SAN for his analysis of the new rules. She then introduced a Barrister and Solicitor of the Nigerian Bar Association, in the person of Mrs. Mary Adeyemo whom she invited to give her own analysis of the new rules from a different point of view.

Mrs. Mary Adeyemo stated that the new rules were accompanied by two practice directions, namely;

  • Expeditious Disposal of Civil Cases: Practice Direction No.1 of 2019 Backlog Elimination; and,
  • Expeditious Disposal of Civil Cases: Practice Direction No.2 of 2019 Pre-Action Protocol.

She then proceeded to evaluate some of the innovations of the new rules. She stated that by virtue of Order 5 of the new rules when it comes to the forms and commencement of actions, any claimant instituting an action must include the pre-action protocol form 01 with other supporting documents, called the pre-action protocol bundle. Failure to do this will nullify the action. She further stated that in any case of service of originating processes, the rules empower the judge to grant an order of substituted service by emails which is cost-effective and time-saving. This is by virtue of Order 9 Rule 5.

She further stated that by virtue of Order 11 Rule 5 or Order 48 Rule 4 under the new rules, legal practitioners are now required to provide their telephone numbers and addresses in the memorandum of appearance. She also stated that where a defendant fails to enter appearance within the time specified by the rules, he shall pay the court a fee of one thousand naira for each day of default. She also made mention of the provisions of Order 21 Rule 6, in which when a party’s notice to produce comprises documents that are not necessary, the party shall pay costs as a penalty which shall not be less than ten thousand naira. She then emphasized the fact that the cost was increased from five thousand in the previous rules.

She then went further, laying focus on the new rules on amendment of originating process and pleadings. This is by virtue of Order 26 Rule 4, which provides that the penalty for not amending any filed process within the specified time has been increased from two hundred naira to one thousand naira for each day of default. She also noted the fact that under the new rules, by virtue of Order 28, there are certain cases that are considered more suitable for Alternative Dispute Resolution under appropriate rules of court.

She noted the fact that the liability of a legal practitioner who neglects to give notice to his client concerning certain issues like discovery and inspection, has been changed from an attachment liability under the previous rules to a committal liability under the new rules. This is by virtue of Order 29 Rule 10. She then made mention of the provisions of Order 30 Rule 1 under the new rules, which provides that the period within which issues of facts and disputes are to be filed after the closing of pleadings has been extended from seven days to fourteen days.

She further went on explaining the doctrine of diligent prosecution provided by the new rules by virtue of Order 34, which states that all parties in a matter must ensure diligent prosecution of their cases. By this section, a judge may, upon application or suo moto strike out a matter which is considered as not being diligently prosecuted. Also, she stated that if no proceeding is held or if no application is filed in a case for a period of 12 months, the Court shall strike out the case. She also made mention of the new prescriptions for a written address under the new rules. She stated that by virtue of Order 35 Rule 3(3), the prescribed amount of pages for a written address is 20 pages with a reply on a point of law not exceeding 5 pages. An application can however be made to the court to file more pages more than the prescribed number of pages.

She began to round up her speech by briefly examining costs and fast-track procedures under the new rules. She stated that by virtue of Order 53 Rule 2, where an offer of settlement made is rejected by a party, and the said party succeeds at trial but the award is given is not in excess of the offer of settlement made, the winning party must pay the costs of the losing party from the time of the offer of settlement up to judgment. She further stated that the time within which a defendant is required to file a response under a fast track procedure has been reduced from forty-two days under the previous rules, to thirty days under the new rules. This is by virtue of Order 59 and 60 of the new rules.

She began to bring her speech to a conclusion, saying that the rules are highly commendable and also that the new rules are a great step in the direction of ensuring the speedy dispensation of justice. She however said that there are certain gaps that the rules did not cover, but she calls upon the judiciary to do their duty to attend to some of these gaps by first ensuring their prompt judicious presence in court. She then closed her speech by making a few remarks.


The session came to an end and MrsChidinmaAgu thanked both guest speakers for dissecting the High Court Civil Procedure Rules of Lagos State, 2019. She then asked if there were any contributions and in absence of any, she gave the vote of thanks and the webinar came to an end at 2.00 pm.


SPEAKER: Pauline McBride

The speaker started by describing what computational law is, she describes is as different from general law that we all know, she said it is a branch of law that involves using Artificial Intelligence to replace legal reasoning.

She noted that we are not quite there yet, but it can be seen that the beginnings of Artificial Intelligence have been imputed already, she mentioned that in 2016 there was an experiment on the use of algorithms, where the writer electra noted that his method has a 79 percent accuracy of predicting outcomes of cases.

The speaker posed the question that could there be robots judges in the future? she noted that in 2019 there was a claim that the Estonian Court planned to use robot judges for small claims cases also in Shanghai Higher peoples court, there are the use of AI-assisted judges.

The speaker talked about an AI tool named Kleros which is built on blockchain where judges are paid via cryptocurrency the law commission of England and Wales are exploring ways of smart contract in judicial operations

The speaker noted that everyone in the field of Law would have access to more data and that there would be a faster way of analyzing legal matters with technology, the speaker noted that nobody intends to go back to the days of manually searching of cases and that if machines could do it effectively and faster then it should be implemented, she noted that there was a report that Brazilian judiciary has a backlog 80 million cases in its judicial depository, she noted that with the age of artificial intelligence these cases could be finished faster, she also noted the law must be general publicly-accessible, clear and concrete.

The speaker noted that the contestability of law is relevant to people’s dignity and its relevance to the rule of law she notes that this is however not guaranteed in computational law as the smart contract does not recognize it, it is not involved in the contextual interpretation of the law as the machines only analyze based on patterns which they are trained to analyze. She noted that the machine uses statistical patterns in predicting the outcome of a case, however, the machine learning system does not understand the text and cannot understand or analyze it like a real judge and representation cannot be made to them as it can only be made to judges.

On the role of Lawyers, the speaker noted that lawyers should reflect on when and how those machines can be implemented as they can’t be implemented everywhere and, in every case, she said, the output of the machine is affected by the data put in them and sometimes they might have a big impact on fundamental rights of people.

The speaker noted that it is important for lawyers to know the capacity and the limitation of technology that they use and, it’s also important for commercial providers of LegalTech to be more open about their product limitations and they should also be opened to criticism and how to develop more on their products.



Speeches were given by the chairman of the committee planning on NBA/SBL, also the president of the Nigerian Bar Association Mr. Olumide Akpata, and also the Attorney General of Lagos state delivered a speech on behalf of the Executive Governor of Lagos state.

The first lecture of the day was delivered by Wendy. A. Okolo PH.D, she noted that there is no one path to a success story and that there are different parts a person can take to be successful, you just have to be good at whatever you do,  she also talked about the opportunities, she noted that opportunities exist everywhere and it’s if you’re willing to look for it then you would see it and you also have to be hardworking honest and have integrity.

She talked about some of the inventions and technological tools that are being invented at NASA and used to aid country such as Uganda and Malawi.


Speaker one was governor Obaseki, Executive Governor of Edo state noted that Edo state has a young and dynamic population of youths who have an interest in technology, he noted that the state had to get the government to adopt technology and that government acts have always been on public platforms which testify to the accountability of the government, he noted that the government is trying to move from being paper-based to digitalized era and in the area of education they are using technological equipment’s to teach students in schools and also it is being used in healthcare centers and also technology devices have been implemented to help in the area of security.

Speaker two, Hon.JusticeKassim: on the state of technology in the judiciary, he noted that there is a judicial council on technology that helps with technological infrastructures in the judiciary, he noted the Nigerian Case Management system which is being used by judges and the features of the Case Management system which includes electronic filing courts profiling among others.

Speaker three, Yetunde Sadiku of the NIPC: speaker noted that the NIPC had to metamorphose from a paper-based organization to a technological based in a gradual manner, she noted that they started from the basic things such as using computers and using easy applications such as Microsoft word and gradually graduating to more complex ones, she talked on the experience she had getting people to start using technology in the organization.

Speaker four was H. E Kayode Fayemi representing the executive governor of Ekiti state:

He stated that the government has been able to show transparency through technology to the people by putting out information on what the government does to their website and through the use of social media, on the use of technological tools in Ekiti, there is a common and control centre which is used in aiding security in the state, also data and tech has been used to determine hotspot of crime in the State, he also mentioned that they are trying to digitalize the government and land documents, also the speaker reiterated the need for people working in the government to have computing and technological skills.


 Speaker/ moderator: Dayo Ademola noted that digital financial services are services delivered through digital channels including mobile devices, she noted that it encompasses established instruments offered by banks as well as new solutions built on cloud and blockchain.

 On the evolution of DFS in Nigeria she noted that there have been different stages namely:

i. Fintech 1.0: this started from Nigerian Banks employing engineers at the back end and the front end to make this work.

ii. Fintech 2.0 which involves a bank launching payment system, in this system the CBN put forward a cashless policy for the first time in Nigeria.

 iii. Fintech 3.0 began late 2019 and it is looking at payment services, bank infrastructures, however, there have been some uncertainties about it due to the covid 19 pandemic.

On the current DFS trains in Africa she noted that they include:

  1. Digital only services
  2. Cryptocurrency and blockchain services Automatic lending and digital credits payment incentives
  3. Integration of AI financial institution.

Speaker two, Mitchel Elegbe noted that for financial inclusion to be successful, we need to think of the end game which is to improve the quality of people’s lives. The needs and wants of people should be looked after and taken care of and only after this has been done would there be time to think of making money.

Babs Ogundeyi the third speaker noted that for financial services to thrive and achieve their aim, affordability and accessibility must be inclusive as all these are necessary tools to help financial services in Nigeria, the speaker also noted that there is a need to communicate services and the advantages of being financial inclusive to the general public.


First speaker EmemEhi,  noted that the creative industry is still growing exponentially and it has a lot of opportunities the speaker noted that during the time when the speaker decided to go into the entertainment industry’s this opportunity were not that much in availability and that the situation of things then have really changed.

The Second speaker AuduMakori noted that during his time in legal practice, it became clear to him that there was a necessity for lawyers in the entertainment industry and this was part of what facilitated him to move to the entertainment industry.

On what lawyers should avoid while making a switch to the entertainment industry,

Emem Ema noted that there is a need to understand the industry and figure out where you can be of help, the speaker also noted that the industry is changing and that a lawyer has to be steps ahead.

AuduMalkori noted that a lawyer has to be updated and know the steps to take when going forward, also lawyers have to see themselves as problem solver in order for them to thrive in the entertainment industry.

Nnamdi Patrick Onuh noted that there is an export of creativity in Nigeria but in the entertainment industry, be it arts, music, fashion or movies there is a chance for lawyers to always capitalize on these industries.



14 JULY 2021

  • Disputes
  • Landlord tenant
  • Employee
  • Supplier
  • Client/customer
  • Co-founder/shareholder
  • infringement
  • Regulatory breach
  • Fundraising


  • Regulatory matters


  • GDPR
  • Commercial contracts




  • Commercial property
  • Employment
  • Directors’ duties – consequences
  • Claim by the company (whether or not in liquidation).
  • Derivative claim by a member on behalf of the company.
  • Claim for misfeasance.
  • Consequences of a successful claim may include:
  • Payment of damages/equitable compensation to company. Setting aside of transaction, restitution, accounting for improper profits. Restoration of company’s property.
  • Injunction.
  • Costs (potentially including the other side’s).
  • Termination of service contract/Disqualification from acting as a director/manager.
  • Reputational damage. In the case of breach of section 182. criminal penalties
  • Directors’ duties – conflict of interests

Examples include where a director:

Is on the board of, is a significant shareholder in, or is themself, a supplier to or customer of the company.

• Is on the board of, is a significant shareholder in, or is themself, a major shareholder of the company.

• Has a role with one of the company’s advisers.

• Is approached by a potential bidder, offering the director a role with the potential bidding group.

Holds multiple directorships.

Directors’ duties

“172. Duty to promote the success of the company

(1) A director of a company must act in the way he considers, in good faith, would be most likely to promote the success of the company for the benefit of its members as a whole, and in doing so have regard (amongst other matters) to-

a) the likely consequences of any decision in the long term,

(b) the interests of the company’s employees,

(c) the need to faster the company’s business relationships with suppliers, customers and others,

(d) the impact of the company’s operations on the community and the environment,

(e) the desirability of the company maintaining a reputation for high standards of business conduct, and the need to act fairly as between members of the company.

What are my duties as a director? (Companies Act 2006)

1 Act within powers

2 Promote the success of the company

3 Exercise independent judgement transactions or arrangements with the company

4 Exercise reasonable care, skill and diligence

5 Avoid conflicts of interest

6 Not accept benefits from third parties 

7 Declare interests in proposed or existing

Model Articles

Part 2-directors

14. Conflicts of interest

14-(1) If a proposed decision of the directors is concerned with an actual or proposed transaction or arrangement with the company in which a director is interested, that director is not to be counted as participating in the decision-making process for quorum or voting purposes.

(2) But if paragraph (3) applies, a director who is interested in an actual or proposed transaction or arrangement with the company is to be counted as participating in the decision-making process for quorumand voting purposes.

(3) This paragraph applies when

(a) the company by ordinary resolution disapplies the provision of the articles which would otherwise prevent a director from being counted as participating in the decision-making process;

(b) the director’s interest cannot reasonably be regarded as likely to give rise to a conflict of interest, or

(c) the directors inflict of interest arise from a permitted cause.


lawpavilion • July 26, 2021

Previous Post

Next Post

Leave a Reply