₦airaland Forum

Mathewrichard99:
In actual fact, this boy turned Senator and called Nwebonyi has a bad mouth. He has anger issues couple with area boy vibes. This is the same idiot that was abusing Madam Ezekwesili few days ago. All these boys that supposed to be learning trade, doing Nwa boy for one Oga somewhere. He's so unfit to be in that NASS.

So it is Ezekwesili that is fit to be calling one unprintable names? Why not call the two out together?

DeLaRue:


There was no court injuction mandating the man to marry her.

I believe Mrs Uduaghan sued Mr Uduaghan to compel Mr Uduaghan to fulfil hiis marriage promise. From what I read in the press, it appeared they settled the matter out of court and the case did not proceed to hearing.

Having willingly settled the matter, they then went ahead to marry each other. I believe that disproves any suggestion of coercion.

In other words, Mr Uduaghan, an adult male capable of independent thought decided that he would marry Mrs Uduaghan afterall, and did so.

Where then is the duress?

A mutual agreement between two individuals to marry is NOT a binding contract, and is subject to a change of mind by either party at any point before the wedding ceremony, after which either partner may initiate divorce.

To answer your question enquiring where the coercion or duress might be evident, please check the boded words in your own opinion above.

This man definitely wears diapers

BlueStripper:
This marriage is filled with drama. Can't this man see that he is being used? This woman filled a lawsuit against her husband when they broke up, he literally married her under duress.

Nigerians demand an apology from you, your wife Natasha, Akapabio, Nwaebonyi etc.

LEAVE US ALONE AND SORT OUT YOUR MARITAL WOES.

Abi my Brother.
They are just dragging us into their personal problems.
Nigerians have more pressing challenges to face than Natasha and Akpabio.

DeLaRue:
In old English law, it was not uncommon for a woman to sue a man to enforce a promise of marriage. So, what Mrs Uduaghn did is not as strange to the courts as many of you think. It certainly is not proof of duress.

It is difficult to see a credible legal escape for the Senator here.

If I was advising him I would suggest he offers an apology on that point alone, and move on.

It might be a little embarrassing for him, but it would be better than the alternative which is several years of legal battle with lots of money wasted.

Old English law is very interesting. For example in the past, it was not a crime to wee in public for male motorists as long as the man's long trenchcoat was shielding his member from being seen by other motorists and he has his right hand on the roof of his car to ensure his trenchcoat blocks his male member from being seen by cars coming behind him in the same direction since they practice right hand drive in the UK.

In old English law, there were some legal ramifications to consider when breaking off an engagement.

Before the Family Law Act 1981 came into effect, the happy announcement of an engagement was considered to be a legally binding contract. If the engagement was called off without any lawful justification, the person responsible for pulling out could be sued for damages for breach of promise.

But since the 1981 Act, you can no longer take legal action for breach of promise following a broken engagement. However, if there is any dispute between the couple over property, finances and gifts, then the Family Law Act gives them the right to take legal action – this ramification isn’t just directly between the couple but is extended to third parties such as family members.

It is wise to remember that this only applies to engaged couples and not couples who live together – there is a different set of rules for cohabitees.

They claim to be friends to Natasha's husband yet maltreat and defame his wife? That's out of character for so called friends.

This incident started for bad treatment against Natasha on the floor if the senate which had happened more than once.

DeLaRue:
I think she will be selective, and go after those she can do the most damage to.

No point going after a youth copper earning N77,000 who overran his or her mouth on twitter. Ofcourse, I do not suggest that you fall in that category.

Her lawyer will generally assist her to select the right type of people to sue.

The lady appears to be someone who would not shy away from a fight, so I expect some people to be quaking in their boots, wondering if they will be her next target

Nice one but methinks she won't have the muscles to fight too many folks......Akpabio and his goons are already a big portion on her dinner plate. IMO,the lady is one canny and not very truthful fellow. Her marital adventures and other fictitious claims of sexual abuse allegations against some others, doesn't leave a sweet taste in the bud....

How is someone's marriage this man's problem?

Shey he should have looked for another means to defend Akpabio and not say things without proof.

Jakumo:
A mutual agreement between two individuals to marry is NOT a binding contract, and is subject to a change of mind by either party at any point before the wedding ceremony, after which either partner may initiate divorce.

To answer your question enquiring where the coercion or duress might be evident, please check the boded words in your own opinion above.

My point was not about whether or not she would have been successful in her court claim to enforce a marriage promise.

The point is whether Mr Uduaghan ultimately and willingly agreed to marry her. All the facts available in the public domain suggest that to be the case.

In law, to establish duress, you have to prove coercion, or what in ordinary parlance most people call 'force'.

My point is, the fact that someone sued you to marry them, and you both agreed to withdraw the court case, and later got married disproves any suggestion that you were forced into that marriage.

Mr Uduaghan is an adult. He chose to marry the woman. And besides, Mr Uduaghan has not alleged duress. Instead, it is a stranger, a 3rd party, who is alleging Mr Uduaghan was forced to marry the woman.

Even if this is not before a court, and the matter is instead before a village council of elders sitting under a tree, will the elders not ask the stranger
'what is your business?'.

A husband says he marries willing. You that you're not part of the marriage insist the husband was coerced. Isn't that odd.

Trust me, the Senator will either apologise, or pay through the nose for the statement he made.

DeLaRue:
My point is not about whether or not she would have been successful in her claim to enforce a marriage promise.

The point is whether Mr Uduaghan ultimately and willingly agreed to marry her. All the facts available in the public domain suggest that to be the case.

In law, to establish duress, you have to prove coercion, or what in ordinary parlance most people call 'force'.

My point is, the fact that someone sued you to marry them, and you both agreed to withdraw the court case, and later got married disproves any suggestion that you were forced into that marriage.

Mr Uduaghan is an adult. He chose to marry the woman. And besides, Mr Uduaghan has not alleged duress. Instead, it is a stranger, a 3rd party, who is alleging Mr Uduaghan was forced to marry the woman.

Haba.

Even if this is not before a court, and the matter is instead before a village council of elders under a tree, will the elders not ask the foreign interlopper 'what is your business?'.

Chai ! You lawyers sabi nack grammar no be small ting. That said, legal practitioners are a necessary evil.

If I ever found myself forced to shoot an intruder and then have no time to transport the evidence away, it is a lawyer that I will call to persuade a judge that I had no choice.

A statement coming from someone who was married under duress.

🤣🤣🤣😂😂😂

AleAirHub:
A statement coming from someone who was married under duress.

🤣🤣🤣😂😂😂

Marital enslavement is a terrible sentence to serve, and it is made worse when people jeer the victim for being a Super Simp/Wimp..

The apology is for what exactly? That he spoke the truth or they are ashamed that he spoke the truth?

Jakumo:
Marital enslavement is a terrible sentence to serve, and it is made worse when people jeer the victim for being a Super Simp/Wimp..

Honestly, I often wonder if the husband is truly a Delta State man. He has undeniably crowned himself the king of simps in Africa and beyond. He and his wife should stop embarrassing themselves in public.

DeLaRue:
No the facts are not there for everyone to see. The way things operate in a court is different from how people see things outside.

In old English law, it was not uncommon for a woman to sue a man to enforce a promise of marriage. So, what Mrs Uduaghn did is not as strange to the courts as many of you think. It certainly is not proof of duress.

It is difficult to see a credible legal escape for the Senator here.

If I was advising him I would suggest he offers an apology on that point alone, and move on.

It might be a little embarrassing for him, but it would be better than the alternative which is several years of legal battle with lots of money wasted.

In my experience though, most Nigerians do not like honest lawyering. They prefer to fight to the end.

PS. I won't be superised if Mrs Uduaghan sues several more people for throwaway statements they made about her on TV and social media.

What you just said, ask 10 lawyers in a room and you will come out more confused

whether oxford or luminary dictionary ... "Duress is Duress" no context makes it palatable the document is in public domain

Besides what does new english law say

Jakumo:
Chai ! You lawyers sabi nack grammar no be small ting. That said, legal practitioners are a necessary evil.

If I ever found myself forced to shoot an intruder and then have no time to transport the evidence away, it is a lawyer that I will call to persuade a judge that I had no choice.

2 things sir,

1. If you are confronted (very important word) by an intruder, you must respond in a proportionate (another important word) way. That is, your response must be comparable to the threat that you faced from the intruder. If the intruder is only armed with a kitchen fork for example, and you shoot him, you could end up in jail because a court may decide that the threat you faced did not justify the use a gun.

Another example : if an intruder comes into your property, grabs your TV, and slaps you on his way out. If you run into your kitchen, grab a knife, chase, catch up with, and stab the intruder in the back, you are most likely going to end up in jail, because at the time you stabbed him, he was no longer much of a threat to you, and so your stabbing him becomes an offensive rather than a defensive action. At the point at which you stabbed him, you were an attacker/protagonist.

2. Before using any gun, make sure you have a license to possess that gun. Otherwise, jail probably beckons.

I pray we never face any of these situations, since most people are not aware of these positions of the law.

I think some of these basic things should be thought as part of civics in secondary school.

Jakumo:
Hahaha I have got to confess, I have never once in my entire life heard of a man who had to be FORCED to marry a woman under duress.

But when one considers how profoundly ugly and combative this old hag, Mrs. Natrasha Abolonjeku has proved to be, both in appearance AND in basic character, it becomes easier to see how force or blackmail might be required to trap ANY man into living in the same house with such a horrid old witch as her cowering husband.

ediko5:
Either the man is an organic simp or he's using the woman to cash out

the man is wealthy

BlueStripper:
This marriage is filled with drama. Can't this man see that he is being used? This woman filled a lawsuit against her husband when they broke up, he literally married her under duress.

Nigerians demand an apology from you, your wife Natasha, Akapabio, Nwaebonyi etc.

LEAVE US ALONE AND SORT OUT YOUR MARITAL WOES.

Why una dey do this na? To what end na? Is it Senator Nwaebonyi's business? How are we not sure Nwaebonyi also married his wife under duress too?

All I see is envy. Natasha no fine but Akpabio flirted with her and nobody can deny that. She no fine, but thank God beauty is in the eyes of the beholder. Let him go and apologize

chidiokay:
What you just said, ask 10 lawyers in a room and you will come out more confused

whether oxford or luminary dictionary ... "Duress is Duress" no context makes it palatable the document is in public domain

Besides what does new english law say

If all lawyers unanimously agree on everything, there would probably be no need for courts to exist.

So it is natural that lawyers will in most cases disagree.

As to what the law says today, I wasn't commenting on whether Mrs Uduaghan would have won her case against Mr Uduaghan. The last Nigerian case I read about this issue was a 1970s case (I can't remember the full detail). It is no longer a common case in Nigeria, but my point was that it was not such an odd case that the court would have been unfamiliar with how to treat such a case.

My reference to English law (from which most of our oldest laws originate) was because such cases were reported more often in England.

In today's Nigeria, my first reaction would be that such case was unlikely to succeed. Unfortunately, we would never know what the outcome would
have been since the court didn't have the opportunity to tackle the matter because Mrs Uduaghan withdrew the case before it was heard.

TempleHouse:
Who ever voted for this Child Igbo Senator should be ashamed of his behaviour and utterances.

Just going around to defend Akpabio like a child is unbelievable!

And people who voted for a mannerless and rude Miss senator should be glad at how unruly she behaved

What utterances came out of Natasha mouth that depict maturity

it is nobody fault if Natasha has no one is the senate to defend her

xjiggy:
Bro, if somebody have to take you to court to enforce your promise of marriage..... you've been put under duress. Anything you're compelled to do against your will is done under duress. Period

you know nothing about the law

Enters the simp!


The marital relationships of Madam Oyibo-Pepper are all over the SM!


How many husbands?


How many children from those failed marital relationships?


Is it true that "High Chief" Emmanuel Uduaghan had a gun of N10b pointed to his head?


It's one's guess that Senator Nwebonyi could readily source for undeniable proof of his "allegations".



Uduaghan may end up attracting more disgrace and shame unto himself and his family members.




@hotseat

chidiokay:
And people who voted for a mannerless and rude Miss senator should be glad at how unruly she behaved

What utterances came out of Natasha mouth that depict maturity

it is nobody fault if Natasha has no one is the senate to defend her

the senator will soon come and apologise just as he did for Oby

I watched one NDDC chairperson said Akpabio will never sign any document by himself but instruct others to so as to prove their loyalty.

That's what is playing out with this daft senator from Ebonyi.
He's a disgrace to South East cos Ebonyi is just a village riddled with cultists and cannibals

NigeriaIsGreat:
the senator will soon come and apologise just as he did for Oby

when will Natasha apologize to senate abi naa all of them sexual squeeze her hand

Tjra:
The mumu reminds me of Timmy Dakolo that year 🤣

Hahahaha

NigeriaIsGreat:
the man is wealthy

Natasha is also wealthy checkout the lawsuit she died the man. The man uses her as a consultant to source for oil and gas contracts

SugarRay001:
instead,,,its like i would go back to school for a second degree,,this time it would be LAW,,,cos lawyers dey cashout for this country with nonsense

Not a bad idea in a sane society. But in Nigeria, with any course you study, you have to be a criminal first before embarking on the course of study if you want to be relevant in Nigerian society.

For example, if the man from Iragbiji in Osun State currently holed up in Aso Rock were to study Law and get a pass (even when aided by exam malpractice and identity theft), the drug baron will still make a financial headway in Nigeria because, Tinubu was a big time criminally minded person first before factoring in any other thing.


But if you are not a seriously dyed in wool criminal in Nigeria, the lord is your shepherd.

DeLaRue:
2 things sir,

1. If you are confronted (very important word) by an intruder, you must respond in a proportionate (another important word) way. That is, your response must be comparable to the threat that you faced from the intruder. If the intruder is only armed with a kitchen fork for example, and you shoot him, you could end up in jail because a court may decide that the threat you faced did not justify the use a gun.

Another example : if an intruder comes into your property, grabs your TV, and slaps you on his way out. If you run into your kitchen, grab a knife, chase, catch up with, and stab the intruder in the back, you are most like going to end up in jail, because at the time you stabbed him, he was no longer much of a threat to you, and so your stabbing him becomes an offensive rather than a defensive action. At the point at which you stabbed him, you were an attacker/protagonist.

2. Before using any gun, make sure you have a license to possess that gun. Otherwise, jail probably beckons.

I pray we never face any of these situations, since most people are not aware of these positions of the law.

I think some of these basic things should be thought as part of civics in secondary school.

Much food for deep thought is here. These litigative insights are appreciated.

DeLaRue:


There was no court injuction mandating the man to marry her.

I believe Mrs Uduaghan sued Mr Uduaghan to compel Mr Uduaghan to fulfil hiis marriage promise. From what I read in the press, it appeared they settled the matter out of court and the case did not proceed to hearing.

Having willingly settled the matter, they then went ahead to marry each other. I believe that disproves any suggestion of coercion.

In other words, Mr Uduaghan, an adult male capable of independent thought decided that he would marry Mrs Uduaghan afterall, and did so.

Where then is the duress?

Ol boy you funny oh. Someone sues you for something, and you "settle"out of court and do exactly what you were sued for, and you tell me there was no duress simply because the case was withdrawn and you then complied?

The 6th hus_band is demanding an apology, waoh!
Now,what should we the 1st,2nd,3rd,4th & 5th now do? Anyways ,after our meeting tmoro afternoon, we're going to transcorp to address the press conference. 🤣🤣🤣