An Ikeja High Court has dismissed preliminary objections raised by social media personality Martins Otse, popularly known as VeryDarkMan (VDM), in a ₦1 billion defamation suit filed by human rights lawyer Femi Falana (SAN) and his son, musician Folarin Falana (Falz).
The duo took legal action after VDM posted a video on 24 September 2024, in which he allegedly made defamatory statements based on an audio recording by cross-dresser Bobrisky. The recording reportedly accused the Falanas of perverting justice.
The claimants are seeking ₦500 million each in damages, a public apology, and a court declaration that the post was “libellous, injurious, derogatory, and defamatory.”
When the matter was heard on Tuesday, May 20, Justice Fimisola Azeez threw out VDM’s challenge to the court’s jurisdiction, ordering him to pay ₦100,000 each to the two claimants as costs. The judge also instructed the influencer to file his defence promptly.
VDM had argued that the alleged offence occurred outside Lagos State and therefore questioned the court’s authority to hear the case.
READ ALSO: Defamatory Claims: Falana, Falz Give Bobrisky 12 Hours to Tender Public Apology
In response, the claimants filed a counter-affidavit and written address urging the court to dismiss the objection, which it did. The matter has been adjourned until July 8 for mention.
VDM was absent during the hearing but represented by his lawyer, Marvin Omorogbe. Falz appeared in court while his father, Femi Falana, was represented by Ernest Olawanle and Femi Akinyemi.
The claimants also asked the court for a perpetual injunction restraining VDM from making similar statements in the future. They further demanded that the apology be published on all of VDM’s social media pages and in a national newspaper.
Earlier on April 15, Justice Mathias Dawodu had struck out a pre-emptive suit filed by the Falanas on grounds that the substantive case before Justice Azeez rendered it unnecessary. VDM’s separate request for a stay of proceedings was also dismissed.
“We are urging the court to restrain the defendant from publishing similar or identical statements and to declare the Instagram post defamatory,” the claimants said through their lawyers.