Judges panel to decide on BOPEU business

Representing Babereki Investments, Advocate Sidney Pilane raised two objections, firstly arguing at length that the round robin format adopted by BOPEU to remove and add certain members was not a procedure recognised by the law at Babereki Investments. He also argued that the definition of shareholders as per the company’s Act does not refer to BOPEU taking decisions independently and imposing them on the company. But a law clearly exists  stipulating how a shareholders’ meeting is called by the Board. Its makeup includes BOPEU National Executive Committee (NEC) and other Board members. Pilane argued that procedure was not followed when BOPEU decided to make a decision on the basis of a round Robin.

Pilane also cautioned the three Judges against recognising the BOPEU request before them as it would be tantamount to legitimising the BOPEU office bearers whose legitimacy had been the subject of many court cases some of which are yet to be decided by the Courts.