Enemies By Design: How The US And USSR Shaped Each Other's Identity

 

A Kano magistrate court has ordered one Isyaku Shu’aibu who owns a rooster notorious for its loud crows to slaughter it.

 

The ruling was delivered by Magistrate Halima Wali on April 4, 2023, after two neighbours of Shu'aibu lodged a complaint in court, alleging that the rooster's loud crowing disrupts their sleep and the tranquillity of the neighbourhood.

                 

One of the complainants, Yusuf Muhammed, from Ja’en quarters, argued in court that the rooster's incessant crowing was infringing on his right to have a peaceful night's rest. Although Shu’aibu acknowledged his rooster's proclivity for crowing noisily, he asked the court to postpone the verdict until Friday.

 

The magistrate, however, was swayed by the arguments of the plaintiffs and ordered that the rooster be caged and slaughtered on April 7th, in the interest of the neighbourhood's peace.

 

In a similar development, a Magistrate court in Enugu has awarded N150,000 in damages to a man who sued a lady for failing to honour their agreement. According to reports, the woman had collected N3,000 from the petitioner for transportation to visit him but failed to show up.

 

Following the incident, the man dragged the lady to court on the grounds of obtaining money under false pretenses. In delivering the judgement, the Chief Magistrate ruled in favour of the petitioner and ordered the lady to pay the sum of N150k in damages. The petitioner had told the court that after he sent the money, the lady switched off her phone.

 

The news was shared on Twitter by a lawyer known as @egi_nupe, who stated that the court's decision to award damages against the lady was to serve as a deterrent to others who might engage in similar fraudulent acts.

 

He wrote;

 

“A court in Enugu has reportedly set a good precedent by awarding damages of 150k against a lady. She was given 3k as transport fare to visit a guy and after collecting the money, she switched off her phone and refused to visit him. Infuriated by her action, he reported and sued her for deceit.

 

In the judgment, the magistrate held that the lady’s action was deceitful and awarded the sum of 150k against her to serve as deterrence to others with such deceitful behavior.”