Headlines
My Son Interested in Buying English Club, Liverpool, Says Elon Musk’s Father
Errol, father of Elon Musk, has revealed that the billionaire entrepreneur has expressed interest in purchasing Premier League team Liverpool.
Musk, whose net worth is estimated at $418 billion, has recently emerged a close ally of U.S President-elect, Donald Trump.
Reports claim that Musk donated approximately $270 million to the Republican Party before their election victory, aiding Trump’s return to the White House.
Since Trump’s November 2024 win, Musk and Trump have been seen together at various events, including celebrations at Mar-a-Lago in Florida, UFC fights, and college football games.
Now, it appears Musk’s attention may be turning toward English football.
Known as the visionary behind Tesla, SpaceX, and X (formerly Twitter), the 53-year-old billionaire seems poised to expand his business empire further by acquiring one of the world’s most iconic football clubs.
When asked about Musk’s interest in Liverpool during an interview with Times Radio in London, his father, Errol Musk, was cautious.
“Has he expressed a desire to buy Liverpool Football Club?” a reporter asked.
“I can’t comment on that. They’ll raise the price,” Errol Musk replied with a laugh.
Pressed further, he admitted that his son has shown interest but refrained from confirming any formal negotiations.
“Oh, yes. But that doesn’t mean he’s buying it,” Errol added. “He would like to, yes, obviously. Anybody would want to – so would I!”
Family ties to Liverpool
When questioned about Musk’s specific interest in Liverpool FC, Errol Musk pointed to the family’s generational ties to the Merseyside city.
“His grandmother was born in Liverpool, and we had relatives in Liverpool. We were fortunate to know quite a lot of the Beatles because they grew up with some of my family. So, we are attached to Liverpool, you know,” Errol revealed.
Musk had previously spoken fondly of his grandmother, Cora Amelia Robinson, who was born in Mossley Hill, Liverpool, in 1923.
She grew up in pre-war poverty, working hard to support her family before emigrating to South Africa in 1944.
Musk once described her as “an important part” of his childhood and credited her with instilling strong values.
“My Nana was one of the poor working-class girls with no one to protect her who might have been abducted in present-day Britain,” Musk shared on X.
“She was very strict, but also kind, and I could always count on her. She grew up very poor in England during the Great Depression only to be bombed in WW2. To earn money for food, she cleaned houses, leaving me with a lasting respect for those who do so.”
The Supreme Court has vacated the order of the Court of Appeal which barred the recognition of David Mark as the National Chairman of the African Democratic Congress, ADC.
The apex court on Thursday held that the preservative order by the Court of Appeal was in bad faith, unnecessary, unwarranted and improper.
In a unanimous judgment of the Supreme Court, Justice Mohammed Lawal Garba held that the Court of Appeal ought not to have made such order because it was not sought by any of the parties in the matter.
The Court of Appeal had issued an order of status quo antem bellum upon which the ADC exco under David Mark was de-recognized by the Independent National Electoral Commission, INEC.
With the vacation of the order, David Mark and the other national officers are to be recognized as ADC leaders by the electoral body.
The convention produced the Tanimu Turaki-led factional national executives of the party.
Attention has shifted to the Supreme Court, which has fixed April 30 (today) for judgment in the leadership tussle within the African Democratic Congress (ADC).
A five-member panel led by Justice Mohammed Garba will resolve the appeal filed by the David Mark-led faction concerning the authentic leadership of the party.
Also on Thursday, the court is expected to determine the leadership dispute rocking the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP).
Two PDP factions—one led by Kabir Turaki and the other by the Minister of the Federal Capital Territory, Nyesom Wike—are laying claim to the leadership of the party.
The Supreme Court had on April 22 reserved judgment in the ADC crisis to a date to be communicated to the parties involved in the tussle.
However, on Tuesday, the ADC formally wrote to the Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN), Justice Kudirat Kekere-Ekun, pleading for the quick delivery of judgment in the leadership tussle at the national level.
The party claimed it would suffer irreparable harm if judgment in the protracted battle was not delivered within the period allowed by the Electoral Act for fielding candidates for the 2027 general elections.
It stated in part: “Without the delivery of judgment within the next three days from the date of this letter, the ADC stands the grave and irreversible risk of being excluded from participating in the 2027 general elections.
“This would disenfranchise millions of Nigerians who have subscribed to the ideals of the ADC and deny them their constitutional right to freely associate and contest elections through a political party of their choice.”
At the April 22 hearing, Jibrin Okutepa, SAN, who represented David Mark, urged the Supreme Court to allow the appeal, arguing that the apex court had earlier, on March 21, 2025, held that “no court has jurisdiction to entertain matters bordering on the internal affairs of political parties.”
During the hearing, Okutepa urged the apex court to hold that the Federal High Court in Abuja lacked jurisdiction to entertain the suit.
However, Robert Emukperu, SAN, who represented the first respondent, Nafiu Gombe, urged the court to dismiss the appeal and affirm the judgment of the lower court, which held that the suit was premature.
It will be recalled that a three-member panel of the Court of Appeal dismissed Mark’s appeal, ruling that it was premature and filed without leave of the trial court.
In the PDP matter, the first appeal, marked SC/CV/164/2026, stems from a decision of Justice Peter Lifu of the Federal High Court in Abuja, who restrained the party from proceeding with its planned convention pending the determination of a suit filed by former Jigawa State Governor Sule Lamido.
On November 14, the court issued a final order restraining the PDP from conducting its national convention.
Justice Lifu held that Lamido was “unjustly denied” the opportunity to obtain a nomination form to contest for national chairman, in violation of the PDP constitution and internal regulations.
The Court of Appeal later upheld the decision on March 9, prompting the PDP to appeal.
The second appeal, SC/CV/166/2026, was filed by the PDP, its National Working Committee (NWC), and National Executive Committee (NEC).
It arose from a judgment delivered by Justice James Omotosho, which stopped the party from holding its Ibadan national convention.
The Court of Appeal upheld that decision, agreeing that INEC should not validate the outcome of the convention.
After hearing all arguments, the Supreme Court reserved judgment, stating that the date would be communicated to the parties.
