Ibru’s Daughters Sue Step-mum over Father's Investments

Two daughters of the late publisher of the Guardian news­paper, Mr. Alex Ibru have dragged his widow, Mrs. Maiden Ibru, and seven of their father’s investment companies before a federal high court in Abuja.

The daughters, Ms. Grace Ibru and Ms. Mabel Ibru, are praying for an order directing the Court Registrar to take over the management of the assets of late billionaire’s four investment com­panies, namely: Alurum Invest­ment Ltd, Oma Investment Ltd, DadIfol Ltd and RFC ltd.

They stated in a 54-paragraph petition that Maiden Ibru and her brother, Alexander Thomopulos who are not shareholders in any of Alex Ibru’s investments have become parasites and impostors on the deceased’s investment and estate.

In the suit marked FHC/ABJ/PET/17/14, dated December 9, 2014 and filed on behalf of the plaintiffs by their counsel, Ahmed Raji (SAN), the daughters held that their father died on 21 No­vember 2011, leaving wills dated 22nd May, 1989 and another dated July 6, 1992 and that Omano Trust under Part C of the Companies and Allied Matters Act (CAMA), of which they are co-trustees, is third will of their late father dated September 8, 2011,the executor of the purported.

The petitioners said Mrs. Maid­en Ibru and her brother have been unlawfully representing and hold­ing out themselves as agent, rep­resentatives and the alter ego of the late Alex Ibru’s investments as they claim that the restraining order of the court did not cover the late Ibru’s corporate assets.

They said that Mrs. Maiden Ibru’s ultimate ambition is to un­lawfully ride on Alex Ibru’s estate companies to become the Chair­man of Ikeja Hotels Plc and there­by consolidate her position as a “de facto and maximum control­ler” of Alex Ibru’s estate and to finally dissipate them to the total exclusion of all the beneficiaries of Alex Ibru’s will, including the first three children of Alex Ibru, born by his first wife.

They prayed the court for an order restraining Ibru’s invest­ment Companies from selling, mortgaging or otherwise dispos­ing of any of its properties and assets, movable and immovable, pending the final determination of the cases as well as restraining the respondents from causing any of their records with the CAC to be changed or altered.