According to a statement signed and issued by Barrister Shehu Wada, on behalf of Max Air: “We have been briefed, and Max Air Ltd (our client) has retained our services as solicitors. Our client is an indigenous and reputable airline, registered under Nigerian laws as an air transport services operator.
“For over two decades, our client has led in air transportation of passengers in international and domestic routes.
Directing its response to thw newspaper that publishwd thw rwporr,Max Aie lawyer declared: “Additionally, our client noticed your Big Story on pages 1 and 30 of the Wednesday, July 17, 2024, publication titled ’13 Nigerian Airlines Blacklisted for Contract Breaches’ by your reporter. The content of the publication, as it relates to our client, is completely erroneous, misleading, incorrect, and particularly offensive.
“You stated in your opening paragraph that ‘No fewer than 13 Nigerian airlines have been blacklisted by international aircraft lessors for various contract breaches, Specifically, you included our client’s name among the blacklisted airlines. ‘The blacklisted airlines are Aero, Air Peace, Arik, Azman, Dana, Green Africa, Ibom Air, Max Air, NG Eagle, Overland, Rano Air, United Nigeria Airline, and Value Jet.
“Furthermore, please note that our client operates a series of 737 and 747 aircraft, all fully paid for and owned by our client.
“Moreover, our client is not in the business of leasing aircraft for domestic and international operations. It is important to reiterate that our client owns all her aircraft and does not lease aircraft.
“Our client finds it appalling to read a publication with nationwide and beyond circulation. Your assertion, without any proof, is baseless and untrue. Contrary to your assertions, our client has no aircraft on lease agreements and owes no one for lessor fees. Also, we vehemently deny all other assertions as they misrepresent our client’s aircraft ownership status.
“Nevertheless, the negative impact of these incorrect statements on our client’s business integrity and reputable brand is unacceptable.
“We consider your publication malicious, and it could ultimately attract a tortious action against your organization.
“Your publication left our client in bad taste, leading us to contact you to correct the untrue notion.
“We respectfully demand an apology and the retraction of our client’s name from the erroneous Big Story. Place our demands conspicuously on the front page of your publication.
“Thereafter, we shall perfect our client’s firm instructions to seek redress and also claim damages against you without further recourse to you.
“In conclusion, we trust that you will see the need to act with dispatch and give this correspondence the required attention it deserves.”
