The Supreme Court reserved ruling on the Preliminary Objection and the Motion for amendment.
* Dr Ikpeazu SAN moved a motion seeking to cure the defects upon which the 1st Respondent's Preliminary Objection was predicated. He urged the court to grant the application.
* The CJN asked Dr Ikpeazu of what the motion is about. He replied that the motion is seeking to amend the name of the Counsel appearing under the signature.
* Dr Ikpeazu admitted that the notice of appeal was not attached as Exhibit and apologised to the court for the failure but was asked to be refer to the Record.
* Dr Ikpeazu, upon inquiry from the Court said the essence of their application is to amend as 1st and 2nd Respondents to read 1st and 2nd Appellants
* Chief Olanipekun adopted and relied on the counter affidavit and written address to dismiss the application. He said the application is vague, no attachment, and the application is complicit. The prayer is not grantable.
* Chief Olanipekun submitted that the prayers are vague and the Supreme Court cannot be searching for the missing details.
* Dr Ikpeazu identified the Brief of argument as being filed on the 24th May, 2019. and the Reply Brief was filed on 30th of May. He prayed the court to allow the appeal and set aside the judgment of the Court of Appeal and restored the Tribunal verdict
* The CJN rejected the request for further adumbration by Dr. Ikpeazu. The CJN said the Brief of the Appellants was 43 and that the Appellant decided not to paginate some pages.
* The CJN is complaining about the Appellants' Brief and the spacing.
* The Respondents agreed with the application of Dr Ikpeazu that the judgment in appeal no 553 will apply in Appeal nos 554 and 555
* Chief Olanipekun said that the Respondent Brief was filed on 28 May 2019 and adopted the brief. He urged the Court to dismiss the appeal and affirmed the judgment of the Court of Appeal.
* Yusuf Alli SAN said INEC as a respondent will abide by the judgment of the Court and therefore did not file any process.
* Bode Olanipekun submitted that where election has not been held in the entire state they cannot contend that they have won election
* Judgement fixed for 5th of July 2019
