Court Didn’t Grant Order Of Sharing Formula On Late Dr. Ajayi’s Assets -Children

Late Dr. Tosin Ajayi

Court Didn’t Grant Order Of Sharing Formula On Late Dr. Ajayi’s Assets -Children

The children of Mrs. Oluwayemisi Ajayi, the widow of Dr. Tosin Ajayi, founder of First Foundation Medical Engineering Company Limited, have debunked the stories making the rounds on the social media that a Lagos Federal High Court, on September 7, 2021, awarded Helen Prest, an alleged mistress of the late Dr. Tosin Ajayi, 50 percent of the deceased’s Estate.

Advertisement

This was made known in a press statement issued by children of  the deceased and signed by the dou of Mrs. Olutomi Deru (Nee Ajayi) and Mrs. Omolade Soetan (Nee Ajayi) respectively. 

Part of the statement reads: “the Order, which was strangely granted in the absence of the company and our mum, only granted Helen Prest and her daughter permission to institute their main action and restrained our mum from running the company, pending the determination of the main suit.”

The children said the Orders were temporary Orders and that the court did not make any order granting Helen Prest any share in the Estate of their late dad contrary to the blatantly false and sensational stories being circulated in the social media. 

According to them, “the court did not rule on any of the claims they are making in their main suit and they are not even claiming 50 percent of our late dad’s Estate in their main suit. So, the social media reports are bizarre and so at odds with the court’s Order that one can only conclude that the reports were either sponsored by Helen Prest or issued by her supporters for mischievous purposes”.

The children also alleged that the Orders were fraudulently obtained, as no hearing notice was served on their mum or the company or their lawyers, Kunle Adegoke & Co. 

“The court had previously granted certain interim Orders (also in the absence of the defendants) on August 5, 2021 and our lawyers had earlier filed an application to set aside those interim Orders, the application was still pending before the Court when the court made its September 7 Orders. 

“Helen Prest and her lawyers exhibited the highest level of desperation by pretending to have served our mum with a hearing notice, whereas they never did. They obtained the Orders of the court fraudulently and our lawyers are taking the appropriate steps in this regard” she added.

The press statement further stated that, just a few days before the court’s September 7 Orders, the plaintiffs had served a counter-affidavit against the application filed by their mother to set aside the August 5 interim orders obtained by Helen Prest, which were based on the same information as the September 7 Orders. 

 “So, it was abundantly clear that the defendants would not miss an opportunity to be heard on any other Orders that the plaintiffs were seeking. The plaintiffs have become so desperate that they do not mind to win the matter fair or foul,” the statement read. 

The children’s submitted further that “regardless of whether there was any evidence of the service of a hearing notice before the court, it is quite puzzling that the judge would disregard our mother’s application to set aside its earlier orders that was before it and went on to hear the plaintiffs’ application without giving the defendants another opportunity to appear before the court.” 

On whether they were ready to accommodate Helen Prest’s daughter, Tomisin, in the estate of their father, the children said that that has always been the case.

Stating that, even though their late dad never introduced Tomisin to any member of the family as his daughter, they chose from the outset to accept her as their late dad’s daughter in good faith. 

“In fact, shortly after our late dad’s funeral, we wrote to Tomisin to join as an administratrix in our application to obtain Letters of Administration for our late dad’s Estate, but Tomisin turned down the offer preferring to go it alone.  We later discovered that Tomisin and her mum had shamelessly filed for Letters of Administration several months before our late dad’s funeral”, children stated. 

Meanwhile, Justice Ringim has transferred matter to the Administrative Judge for re-assignment and no date has been fixed for further hearing.

Add a comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Keep Up to Date with the Most Important News

By pressing the Subscribe button, you confirm that you have read and are agreeing to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use
Advertisement