Drama in court as Sophia Momodu lists 6 reasons Davido shouldn't have custody of Imade

Sophia Momodu has listed six reasons why the court should not grant the custody request filed by Davido for their daughter, Imade.

The estranged lovers appeared before Justice Bashua’s family court in Yaba in Lagos State on Friday, July 5, 2024, as a hearing in the custody suit initiated by the Afrobeats artist got underway.

Davido had dragged Momodu to court seeking unfettered and unrestricted access to Imade.

The motion, filed by the singer's lawyers, Dr Olaniyi Arije, Okey Barrah and others, at the Lagos State High Court on April 17, 2024, listed Momodu as the sole respondent.

The award-winning artist had accused the mother of his first child of making demands intended to frustrate his efforts to see Imade.

The singer added that he has been fulfilling his paternal responsibilities to Imade over the years, including paying her school fees, providing transportation and even accommodation.

Momodu says Davido unfit to take care of Imade

However, responding to the lawsuit in a statement, Momodu claimed that Davido had abandoned their child for the past two years.

She also alleged that the singer has since refrained from fulfilling his financial obligations to his daughter, leaving her to solely shoulder expenses including rent, living and travel costs, healthcare, and all other related expenses.

Meanwhile, arguing her case in court on Friday, Momodu's legal team, led by the esteemed Anthony SAN, explained to the Judge why the artist is unfit to be granted custody of Imade.

"The Applicant cannot take proper care of our daughter because he lives a controversial lifestyle (negative media attention) that will expose our daughter to more negative trauma at her tender age.

"The Applicant in his role as an artiste always travels and allows many unsavoury male adults around him and his house, who will not be a good influence on an impressionable young female child, like our daughter.

"The Applicant disagreed with child therapy as the Applicant has been estranged from our daughter for a while and safely and sustainably establishing a meaningful presence in our daughter's life is paramount.

"The Applicant is an artist who always travels around the world as mandated by his career and cannot possibly be with our daughter at crucial times.

"The Applicant is married to another woman, and they live together. The proper upbringing of our daughter by another cannot be guaranteed.

"The fact that the Applicant lost his son in his house in rather unfortunate and questionable circumstances shows that our daughter cannot be placed in the custody of the Applicant," Momodu argued.

Mild drama in court

Meanwhile, a mild drama had earlier ensued in court as Momodu's counsel objected to how his client was served.

The legal team claimed that the service was conducted via newspaper publication, containing the name of a minor, which is a violation of Sections 143, 144, and 145 of the Lagos State Child Rights Law of 2015.

The SAN highlighted the negative impact of the action on the child, including exposure to harmful substances and mental distress.

However, the trial Judge expressed belief that the service was done via WhatsApp. Subsequently, the Judge ordered the media, other litigants, and their lawyers to vacate the courtroom.

He later unilaterally decided to refer the case to the Lagos Settlement Week for resolution.