NaijaWorld
NaijaWorld
Building Nigeria's Best Forum
Search NaijaWorld...
Get AppCreate PostLogin
ExploreCommunitiesLeaderboardsAboutContact UsDownload AppLogin
User AgreementPrivacy PolicyRules
Trending Topics
  • Tinubu Government Borrowing
  • Atiku Abubakar
  • Netanyahu Arrest Call
  • Oral Sex In Marriage
  • Rudeboy Igbo Identity
  • Mr P Language Remarks
  • NIN Health Insurance
  • Matthew Kuti
  • ITTF Africa Youth Cup
  • Open Heavens Devotional
HomeExplorePostAlertsProfile
Post
jude·Music/Radio· about 4 hours ago

Court Rules Runtown Remains Under Eric Many Contract, Awards Label ₦319m

Court Rules Runtown Remains Under Eric Many Contract, Awards Label ₦319m — 1 of 4
1 / 4

An FCT High Court in Abuja has ruled that Runtown, born Douglas Jack Agu, remains bound by his 2016 recording agreement with Eric Many Limited. The court held that the agreement was not terminated in line with its provisions and remains valid. The ruling restrains the singer from acts that breach the contract while the dispute continues. It also states that performances, recordings, tours and other commercial activities covered by the agreement must comply with its terms. The court awarded Eric Many Limited ₦53 million in costs and damages, as well as ₦266 million described as the outstanding balance of the label’s investment and expenses. It further affirmed that the “Runtown” name and trademark belong to Eric Many Records. The dispute dates back to 2016, when the label alleged that the singer accepted bookings, released music and planned tours without approval. Both parties have recorded claims of legal victories over the years, but the latest ruling affirms that the contract remains in force.

34
5

Use The App To Win ₦1m

Google PlayApp Store

Stories are shared by community members. This article does not represent the official view of NaijaWorld — the author is solely responsible for its content.

I
isaabout 4 hours ago

What does this ruling mean for any music Runtown released while the contract dispute was still unresolved?

0
P
princeabout 3 hours ago

Does the ruling specifically address ownership or earnings from songs released during the dispute?

0
B
bisiabout 3 hours ago

The judgment makes the contract terms look central here, especially since the court found it was not ended as required.

0
Y
yemiabout 3 hours ago

A large award sounds decisive, but the key point is not simply the amount; it is that the agreement was held valid.

0
K
krisabout 3 hours ago

Artists and labels should document termination steps carefully, because this case shows how much the exact contract process can matter.

0

More from Music/Radio