Justice James Omotosho of the Federal High Court in Abuja fixed the date following the inability of Meta’s lawyer, Fred Onuobia, SAN, to file the processes on time.

The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that Onuobia, on Oct. 3, had informed the court of Meta’s plan to reconcile with NDPC in the suit the American multinational technology company filed seeking to quash the regulatory agency’s sanction.

The lawyer had told the court after Justice Omotosho had prepared to deliver a ruling on NDPC’s preliminary objection against the suit filed by Meta, the parent company of Facebook and Instagram.

Onuobia begged the court to defer the ruling on NDPC’s preliminary objection and the ruling on the motion on notice to amend their suit.

He told the court that the parties had reached an advanced stage on settlement in the case.

He said the parties “are afraid” that the ruling might affect discussions on settlement.

And after NDPC’s lawyer, Adeola Adedipe, SAN, confirmed Onuobia’s submission, the judge fixed today (Oct. 31) for either adoption of terms of settlement or ruling.

When the case was on Friday, Onuobia, who also appeared for Meta Platforms, Inc., told the court that parties had reached a settlement.

“We are happy to announce to my lord that the parties have reached a settlement,” he said

He, however, apologised to court that though Meta had prepared to settle with NDPC, he was only able to file their documents this morning.

He acknowledged breaching the court protocol for filing processes earlier before proceedings.

He said the development was due to circumstances beyond their control.

“We may ask for a standdown so that the copy for the court can be filed my lord,” Onuobia prayed.

But the judge, who declined to grant application for standdown, said he must perused the terms of settlement thoroughly before delivering his ruling on it.

The judge told the lawyer that it had always been his practice to go through processes filed before his court.

“There are instances that what is not in the claims will be included in the terms of the settlement.

“So I will have to read it,” he said.

Besides, Justice Omotosho said he also had afternoon session where other matters would be heard.

Adedipe, in his response, thanked the judge for accommodating them.

The lawyer observed that earlier, the matter was scheduled for ruling on their objection but the judge reconsidered this to give them the opportunity to explore reconciliation.

Justice Omotosho consequently adjourned the matter until Nov. 3 at 12noon for adoption of the terms of settlement.

The NDPC had, on Feb. 18, imposed both a remedial fee of 32,800,000 million US dollars and eight corrective orders against Meta Inc.

The company was alleged to have violated the fundamental privacy rights of its Nigerian users with respect to behavioural advertising on Facebook and Instagram.

Dissatisfied with the action, Meta Platforms Inc., in a motion ex-parte dated and filed on Feb. 26, dragged the regulatory agency to court as sole respondent.

In the motion ex-parte marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/355/2025 and moved by Fred Onuofia, SAN, on March 4, Justice Omotosho granted one of the two orders sought.

The judge had granted leave to Meta to commence proceedings by way of judicial-review seeking, inter alia, an order of certiorari quashing the compliance and enforcement orders dated Feb. 18 issued by NDPC against the company.

It urged the court to nullify “all other investigations, proceedings and actions taken by respondent against the applicant leading to the ‘Final Orders.’”

The judge, however, refused to grant Meta’s relief seeking a stay of the proceedings of all matters relating to the “Final Orders” issued by NDPC against it, pending the hearing and determination of the judicial review proceedings.

Instead, the judge made an order of accelerated hearing of the suit.

But NDPC, in a preliminary objection filed by its lawyer and the head, ALPHA & ROHI Law Firm, Adedipe, SAN, told the court that the suit was incompetent and the court lacked the jurisdiction to entertain same.

The regulatory agency, in its objection dated April 10 and filed April 11, urged the court to either strike out or dismiss the case.

Adedipe, in two grounds of argument, submitted that the originating summons filed by the company is incompetent for non-compliance with the mandatory provision of Order 34 Rule 6(1) of the FHC (Civil Procedure) Rules, 2019.

Quoting the provision, the lawyer said: “No ground shall be relied upon or any relief sought at the hearing, except the grounds and reliefs sought in the statement.”

He also argued that the suit, as presently constituted, is grossly incompetent and academic, the reliefs sought therein, not being capable of activating the jurisdiction of the court.

“The suit is liable to be struck out/dismissed, in limine,” Adedipe had argued.

The fine against Meta came as one of the measures by the NDPC to protect Nigerians’ data under the Nigeria Data Protection Act, signed into law by President Bola Tinubu in June 2023

The former minister added and his integrity into murky waters, alleging him to be corrupt and fraudulent individual .

He, therefore, sought a declaration of the court that the post is false and defamatory of him.

Agunloye also sought an order for EFCC to retract the defamatory publication against him and tender unreserved apologies.

He further sought the payment of compensation of N1billion as general and exemplary damage to him.

Earlier, the EFCC sole witness, Umar Babangida, an Assistant Commissioner of Police (ACP) who is an investigator with EFCC was cross examined by Adedipe.

Babangida told the court that he was a witness in the criminal case before Justice Jude Onwuegbuzie in Apo, Abuja.

The matter, he said, has not been concluded.

When Adedipe showed the witness the criminal charge against Agunloye to show the court where six billion dollars was contained, Babangida told the court:”there  nothing like that in the charge”.

When shown Paragraph 29 of his witnesses statement on oath, Babangida retracted and confirmed to the court the said publication was from the commission’s media department.

“I don’t know if Exhibit C (the publication) is an EFCC publication. I am an investigator, not in the media department. The publication is from the EFCC media department.”

Earlier, Babangida had, while being led in his evidence by EFCC counsel, O.S. Ajayi, adopted his written statement and urged the court to accept it as his oral evidence in the case.

Justice Peter Kekemeke, adjourned until Feb. 2, 2026 for adoption of parties’ final written addresses.

Agunloye is facing an amended seven-count charge, marked FCT/HC/CR/617/2023, bordering on forgery, disobeying presidential directive and receiving gratification, filed by EFCC on award of the controversial Mambilla hydropower project in Taraba.

EFCC alleged that the former minister awarded contract for the Mambilla project on May 22, 2003 to Sunrise Power and Transmission Company Limited (SPTCL) without any budgetary provision, approval and cash backing.

The commission also, among others, alleged that the former minister received the total sum of N5.212million from SPTCL and Leno Adesanya, through Jide Abiodun Sotirin through Agunloye’s Guaranty Trust Bank (GTB) account, for conveying the Federal Government’s approval for the construction of the Mambilla power project in favour of SPTCL while serving as minister.

Agunloye, however, pleaded not guilty to the charge preferred against him by EFCC.(NAN)