Court to open hearing in N50b suit against INEC, two others

A Federal High Court in Abuja has scheduled hearing for May 27 this year in a suit seeking to among others, bar the Independent National Electoral Commission (INEC) from further use of transparent ballot boxes, permanent voters’ card and related devices for elections.

The suit, filed by a firm – Bedding Holdings Limited – is intended, among others to enforce two pending judgments given by the Federal High Court on June 5, 2012 and January 28, 2014 which affirmed the firm’s exclusive patent rights over some inventions that formed the core of INEC’s electoral operations.

Bedding identified the inventions on which it has patent rights to include: “the Transparent Ballot Boxes (TBB), Electronic Collapsible Transparent Ballot Boxes (ECI’BB), Direct Data Capturing Machines, Electronic Card Reader (ECR), its derivable Permanent Voters’ Card (PVC) and Proof of Address System Scheme (PASS) Embedded with the Concept of the Coded Metal Plate and the Process and Application of these products to produce the Voters’ Register respectively.”

The suit, marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/1537/2018, has Bedding listed as the sole applicant, with INEC, the Attorney General of the Federation (AGF) and the Registrar of Patents, Federal Ministry of Commerce and Industry, listed as respondents.

The applicant wants an order, compelling the respondents to abide by the judgment of the court delivered on June 5, 2012 in a suit marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/82/2011 and on January 28, 2014 in suit: FHC/ABJ/CS/816/2010.
Bedding is also praying praying the court for an order, directing the respondents to pay it N50billion “as exemplary damages for the continued use of the Transparent Ballot Boxes, Electronic Collapsible Transparent Ballot Boxes and Direct Data Capturing Machines for the registration of voters and or the collation/compilation and production of the voters’ register” without its prior and express consent.

It equally seeks an order of perpetual injunction, restraining the respondents from using its inventions and anything derived thereof, without the prior and express consent, and “to declare any action or actions whatsoever and however or purported to have been taken in connection thereto, as illegal, unlawful, unconstitutional, null and null.”

On December 18, 2018, Justice Nnamdi Dimgba (also of the Federal High Court, Abuja) restored the judgment given by Justice Adamu Bello on July 5, 2012 and gave Bedding the permission to commence the process of enforcing the judgment.

In a supporting affidavit, deposed to by its Chief Executive Officer (CEO), Sylvester Odigie, Beddings claimed that the respondents have continued to disregard the judgment of June 5, 2012 and a subsequent one of January 28, 2014 which further confirmed its (the firm’s) exclusive patent rights over the said inventions.

Bedding stated that its core speciality is in the fabrication and manufacture of steel metal products such as transparent ballot boxes, electronic transparent boxes, among other products.

It added that: “On 12th January, 1998 the applicant (Bedding) was issued with Certificate of Registration of Patent Rights No. RP 12994 and Registration of Industrial Designs Rights No. RD 5946 in and over the invention named Transparent Ballot Boxes (“TBB”) by the 3rd respondent (Registrar of Patents).

“Also on 27th November, 2006, the applicant registered and was issued with the Patent Rights No. RP 16642 and Copyright Designs No. RD 13841 in and over the invention named “Electronic Collapsible Transparent Ballot Boxes”, an improved derivative of TBB, which integral features include the Electronic Card Reader (ECR) and it’s derivable Permanent Voters’ Card (PVC) thereof and Patent Rights NORP NG/P/2010/202, Proof of Address System/Scheme (PASS) (Embedded with the concept of the Coded Metal Plate) the process and application of which is used to produce the voters’ register.

“The above-stated Patent and Industrial Designs Rights of the applicant is still valid and subsisting till date having been extended at various times by the 3rd respondent upon the application of the applicant.

“By virtue of the above and the applicant being the exclusive and bona fide patentee of the said Patent and Design Rights over the inventions named Transparent Ballot Boxes (TBB),, Electronic Collapsible Transparent Ballot Boxes (ECTBB); Direct Date Capturing Machines, Electronic Card Reader (ECR), Permanent Voter’s Card, (PVC) and Proof of Address System Scheme (PASS) Embedded with the Concept of the Coded Metal Plate and the Process and Application of these products to produce the voters’ register respectively, the applicant and the 1st respondent (INEC) executed a license agreement on the 29th day of January 2003 wherein the applicant granted to the 1st respondent license over Transparent Ballot Boxes (“TBB”) till 29th of March 2003.

“Further to the above, the 1st respondent, in issuing out award letters to its agents and contractors with respect to the transparent ballot boxes, included a clause informing them of the applicant’s right to the patent.”
Bedding further stated that despite the subsistence of its patent rights over the inventions, the 3rd respondent, on October 14, 2010 issued similar certificates to three other firms in relation to the inventions over which it already had exclusive patent rights.

The firm stated that upon the its “discovery of the multiple registrations and


source:https://samueljackson12.blogspot.com/2019/04/court-to-open-hearing-in-n50b-suit.html