Home Entertainment “Kiss Daniel did not walk out of his contract” – Lawyers release...

“Kiss Daniel did not walk out of his contract” – Lawyers release Press Statement

375
0
SHARE
Spread the love

Hits: 82

Kiss Daniel’s legal advisors, L and A Legal Consultants, have discharged an announcement saying their customer did not leave his agreement with his previous record mark G-Worldwide Entertainment Ltd.

G-Worldwide Entertainment Ltd had dragged Kiss Daniel to court for “finding a way to choose another supervisor, request for appointments, and has kept on arranging and enter execution understandings in regard of the tunes from the collection “New Era,” and “Advancement” which is set to be discharged soon.”

In the announcement discharged by Kiss Daniel’s legal advisors, they said he just ended the agreement as he was allowed to do under the agreement.

The agreement was drafted by G-Worldwide, the attorneys composed, and they embedded an end statement in the agreement, which Kiss Daniel initiated.

L and A Legal Consultant, in the press articulation, additionally uncovered that G-Worldwide has for some time been declining to allow their customer unhindered

access to his record and books, as he is allowed to do under the agreement.

Read the press explanation underneath:

1. Kiss Daniel did not leave his agreement. He just ended it as he is allowed to do under the agreement. Is it now a wrongdoing for a gathering to practice a privilege explicitly gave on him by law/contract? Is it the blame of Kiss Daniel that the agreement has an end statement that permits Kiss Daniel to end the agreement? We should remember that the agreement was drafted by G-Worldwide Entertainment.

Kiss Daniel conscientiously took after the arrangement of the agreement. Tragically that individuals are blending this case up with that of different specialists fleeing from an agreement they marked. No! This is extraordinary. This is an instance of an Artist demanding that the agreement marked by the gatherings must be obeyed and upheld. Kiss Daniel is firm adherent to manage of law and due process. This was the reason it was Kiss Daniel that went to court first. Individuals ought not confound an instance of legitimately ended contract with instances of misguided specialists who furiously left their agreement without following the set down technique under their agreements. Kiss Daniel’s case is a well thoroughly considered act. It is an activity of right allowed to him by the agreement amongst him and his name.

What do individuals need from Nigerian craftsman? On the off chance that they don’t utilize legal advisors, individuals condemn them. Since Kiss Daniel has utilized extraordinary compared to other I.P. law office in Nigeria with a Professor of I.P. what’s more, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), individuals are as yet calling him names for acting as per his agreement! At the point when Artist don’t obey or state their rights under their agreements, individuals manhandled them, yet similar individuals are mishandling Kiss Daniel for obeying and authorizing the Termination Clause gave in his agreement! Na wa o. This isn’t a Kiss Daniel’s battle alone. This is a battle for every single Nigerian craftsman aside from we are stating just craftsmen must obey and consent to contract yet record name are allowed to do as they wish?

2. Fund: Why is G-Worldwide reluctant to allow Kiss Daniel unhindered access to his record and books as gave by the agreement? The entire connection between a record mark and a craftsman is tied in with profiting and sharing it. Fund and cash is the essence of the issue. G-Worldwide did not sign Kiss Daniel since they cherish his face. They marked him since they figure he can profit for

them. What’s more, there is nothing amiss with that as long as they play by the tenets. The main offense remarked by Kiss Daniel was his presumption/impudence by setting out to request that his record mark render account! Kiss Daniel through his legal counselor L and A – Legal Consultant named a firm of Chartered Accountant to examine and review G-Worldwide Entertainments books and record in regard of Kiss Daniel’s venture as gave by the agreement between the gatherings.

Instantly the demand was made, all damnation was let free. For what reason will a Record Label be reluctant to enable their Artist to investigate their books of record? Particularly, when the agreement between the gatherings was drafted by a similar record mark and the agreement contains a proviso which particularly gave that the Record Label might keep all records and should permit the Artist or his agent unlimited access to review and make duplicates of the records. See condition 7 of the agreement between the gatherings which gives:

“Organization might keep up appropriate bookkeeping books and additionally records at its key office, in connection to income produced, or use consumed throughout the execution of this Agreement. Such books or potentially records should incorporate, yet might not be constrained to, any reports or records which confirm the receipt as well as payment of eminences and different monies produced over the span of the execution of the Agreement.

The Artist might, whenever amid the term of this Agreement and upon earlier composed notice to Company, Artist or his/her assigned delegate should increase unhindered access to review the books and records of the Company identifying with this Agreement and should be qualified for make duplicates thereof.”

In light of above, Kiss Daniel’s legal advisor kept in touch with G-Worldwide on the eighteenth of July 2017 saying along these lines:

“This is to educate you that as per the Recording Contract between the gatherings, our customer wishes to send his Accountants (WYZE Associates) to investigate/review his records with your customer.

Sympathetically affirm your helpful date from one week from now when the Accountants can come in for the investigation/review.”

Obviously they fizzled/declined to react to the above email and just reacted on the 25th of July 2017 (after a few updates) saying:

“I by one means or another missed your underlying email. Expressions of remorse. I will talk about your demand with my customer and will return with a reaction before CoB tomorrow.”

Not surprisingly, they neglected to react on the 26th of July 2017 as guaranteed and Kiss Daniel’s legal counselors needed to send another update by method for email and phone call before they at long last reacted on the first of August 2017 saying:

“With respect to date for the “review”, would we be able to concur on a date in late August or early September? A prior date won’t be perfect Emperor Geezy is getting hitched on Saturday and will be inaccessible for quite a while after the wedding (for evident reasons).”

What’s more, Kiss Daniel’s legal advisors reacted by saying:

“It is our understanding that we are managing an organization (G-World Entertainment Ltd) and not a person. Consequently, the inaccessibility of Emperor Geezy would not influence the review. If you don’t mind take note of that the review will just include G World Accountants and our Accountants. Along these lines, the nearness of Emperor Geezy isn’t vital at this stage. In perspective of the above, we can plan the review to a prior date. Generously affirm when our Accountants can desire the review inside this week or one week from now.”

Is G-overall Entertainment Limited an appropriate record name? Is it an appropriate constrained obligation organization? Or on the other hand is it just a limited show without corporate structure, office and supporting staff? Would anybody be able to name the An and R officer of G-overall Entertainment Limited?

Anyway, G-overall Entertainments Limited reacted by making another reason when they expressed in this way in their email of fourth of August 2017:

“While the organization is cheerful to help your customer’s bookkeepers with their review ask for, tragically because of continuous exercises including the significant organization’s faculty, the time proposed by you won’t be advantageous for the organization (whose help you require to do the review).

In the situation, we propose that we ought to concur on a day in the most recent seven day stretch of August for the review work out. We will sit tight for you to propose a particular date amid the said period for the review.”

Despite the fact that it was clear to Kiss Daniel and his group that G-overall Entertainment Limited was attempting to disappoint the assessment/review, they proceeded to surrendered to the finish of the month proposed by G-overall Entertainments Limited and sent them a mail on the on the seventh of August 2017 saying:

“Our bookkeepers will be accessible on 28th and 29th August 2017 for the review. Benevolently affirm that the dates. Likewise affirm your customer’s address.”

Once more, G-overall Entertainments Limited fizzled/declined to affirm the dates for the investigation or the scene as asked for and after a few updates they just on the 28th of August 2017, which is one of the dates settled for the assessment and consented to the 29th of August 2017 for the said review/review. In this manner giving Kiss Daniel and his group under 24 hours’ notice and which implies the review must be done in one day rather than two dates proposed. Obviously, any experience individual realizes that such review can barely be finished in one day. It was every one of the a great outline to baffle the review.

Lamentably, when the examination/review at long last held, Kiss Daniel’s Accountant was denied unhindered access to the “books/records” in clear break of the unambiguous arrangements of proviso 7 of the Contract (as posted previously). Kiss Daniel’s Accountant were astonished that Label did not go to the setting of the review/review with any physical books, receipts, solicitations e.t.c. in any case, just brought an insignificant tablet! Furthermore, even declined to permit Kiss Daniel’s Accountant to make a duplicate of the said “books/records” in opposition to the agreement. It was likewise found that the agent sent by G-overall Entertainment Limited and who brought the portable workstation isn’t a bookkeeper and did not know anything about the exchanges recorded in the tablet. He couldn’t answer any of the inquiries/questions presented on him by Kiss Daniel’s Accountant.

In light of the above breaks (inability to permit unlimited access and to make duplicates of the books of record as gave in provision 7 of the Record contract), Kiss Daniel’s legal counselors gave G-overall Entertainment Limited 14 days’ notice to cure the rupture as gave