Defamation Ruling: VeryDarkMan Ordered to Pay N30 Million to Mr Jollof’s Wife for False Adultery Claims

A Federal High Court in Effurun, Delta State, has delivered a landmark judgment in a defamation case involving Nigerian social media influencer VeryDarkMan and the wife of comedian Mr Jollof. The court ordered VeryDarkMan to pay N30 million in damages for falsely accusing Mrs. Esinjemiyotan Uruneyonjuyei Atsepoyi of adultery. This case underscores the legal consequences of spreading unsubstantiated allegations online, particularly in Nigeria’s rapidly evolving digital landscape.

Background of the Dispute

The controversy erupted in September 2024 during a heated online altercation between VeryDarkMan and Mr Jollof. In a series of posts, VeryDarkMan alleged that Mrs. Atsepoyi had engaged in extramarital affairs with politicians and “Yahoo boys” (a term for internet fraudsters) to help her husband secure a political appointment in Delta State. These claims were made without any supporting evidence.

In response, Mr Jollof retaliated with personal attacks, describing VeryDarkMan as a “product of a broken home” and questioning his upbringing. However, the focus quickly shifted to the defamatory statements made against his wife.

Legal Action and Court Proceedings

Mrs. Atsepoyi, feeling deeply wronged by the false accusations, filed a N500 million defamation lawsuit against VeryDarkMan. She argued that the allegations had tarnished her reputation, caused emotional distress, and exposed her to public ridicule. The case was heard before Hon. Justice R. Harriman at the Delta State Federal High Court in Effurun.

During the trial, VeryDarkMan failed to provide any credible evidence to support his claims. The court noted that the allegations were baseless and had been widely disseminated across social media platforms, amplifying their harmful impact.

Court Ruling and Damages Awarded

In a judgment delivered on May 13, 2026, Justice Harriman ruled in favor of Mrs. Atsepoyi. The court declared that the words published by VeryDarkMan were defamatory in their natural and ordinary meaning and actionable per se—meaning they were inherently damaging without needing to prove special harm.

The judge awarded the following:

• N20,000,000 (Twenty Million Naira) as general damages for the harm to the claimant’s reputation.
• N10,000,000 (Ten Million Naira) as aggravated damages, reflecting the malicious and reckless nature of the defamation.

Additionally, the court issued a 14-day ultimatum for VeryDarkMan to publish a formal apology in two national newspapers and across all his social media handles. The apology must include a clear retraction of the defamatory statements made on September 15, 16, and 19, 2024. The court also granted an injunction restraining VeryDarkMan, his agents, or associates from making any further defamatory publications against Mrs. Atsepoyi.

Legal Precedents Cited

Justice Harriman referenced key Nigerian case law, including DIAMOND BANK v. OKPALA (2016) LPELR-41573(CA) and OBOK & ORS v. AGBOR & ORS (2016) LPELR-41219(CA), to support the award of general and aggravated damages. These precedents reinforce the principle that defamation victims are entitled to compensation for reputational harm, especially when the defamatory material is widely circulated.

Implications for Social Media Influencers

This ruling serves as a stark warning to content creators and influencers who use their platforms to spread unverified allegations. In Nigeria, defamation laws are robust, and courts are increasingly willing to impose significant financial penalties to deter malicious speech. The case highlights the importance of fact-checking and responsible communication, particularly when making claims about individuals’ private lives.

For context, defamation cases in Nigeria can be complex, requiring plaintiffs to prove that the statements were false, published to a third party, and caused reputational harm. However, when statements are inherently defamatory—such as accusations of adultery or criminal activity—the burden of proof shifts to the defendant to show the claims were true or protected by privilege. VeryDarkMan’s failure to provide evidence sealed his liability.

Practical Example: What This Means for Online Behavior

Consider a scenario where a blogger accuses a public figure of corruption without evidence. If the accusation goes viral, the blogger could face a defamation lawsuit similar to this case. The court may order damages, a public apology, and an injunction against further statements. This ruling reinforces that the internet is not a lawless space; digital speech carries real-world consequences.

Conclusion

The judgment against VeryDarkMan is a significant victory for defamation victims in Nigeria. It affirms that individuals have the right to protect their reputation from baseless attacks, even when the defamer is a popular online personality. For Mrs. Atsepoyi, the N30 million award and mandated apology represent a measure of justice, though the emotional toll of public humiliation may linger.

As social media continues to shape public discourse, this case serves as a critical reminder: words have power, and with that power comes responsibility. Whether you are an influencer, journalist, or casual user, always verify before you post. The cost of defamation—both financial and reputational—can be devastating.

[[PEAI_MEDIA_X]]

All credit goes to the original article. For more information, read the Source link.