United Bank For Africa sues energy company Polaris Bank for over 2.8 billion naira


A Federal High Court sitting in Lagos has ruled out Integrated Energy Distribution and Marketing Company Ltd and Polaris Bank from falsifying, however, funds to their credit up to $ 6,759,000 (around 2.8 billion naira) or its equivalent in n Any currency in 25 banks, the Debt Management Office and the Federal Ministry of Finance.

Judge Daniel Osaigor, who issued Mareva’s interim injunction order, ruled that it remains pending the hearing and decision of a notice motion filed against the duo by the United Bank for Africa (UBA ).
The July 2 order followed UBA’s June 29 request filed and argued by its attorney, Temilolu Adamolekun, who appeared with Gbenga Akinde-Peters, supported by an affidavit under oath from Anike Isinguzo and exhibits. attached.

Integrated Energy Distribution and Marketing Company Ltd and Polaris Bank are the 1st and 2nd defendants in lawsuit number FHC / L / CS / 714/21.

The 3rd to 26th respondents are Access Bank plc), (Citibank Nigeria Ltd), (Diamond Bank Plc), (Ecobank Nigeria ltd), (Enterprise Bank Ltd.), (Fidelity Bank Plc.), (First Bank of Nigeria Plc. ), (First City Monument Bank Plc), (Globus Bank Limited), (Guaranty Trust Bank Plc), (Heritage Bank Plc.), (Jaiz Bank Limited), (Keystone Bank Limited), (Polaris Bank Limited), (Providus Bank Limited), (Stanbic IBTC Bank Nigeria Ltd.), (Standard Chartered Bank Ltd.) (Sterling Bank Plc.), (SunTrust Bank Nigeria Limited). (Titan Trust Bank Limited), (Union Bank Plc), (Unity Bank Plc.). (Wema Bank Plc.) And (Zenith Bank Plc).

The 28th and 29th respondents are the DMO and the Ministry of Finance.

The court further prevented the 3rd to 26th defendants or their agents from remitting the sum to the defendants.

The order also prevented the 1st defendant from dealing with funds to his credit in all of his accounts, or any money in which he held interest on his behalf with the 27th to 29th defendants up to $ 6,759,000 or its equivalent.

The court prohibited the 2nd defendant from dealing with any of the sums of money, instruments, sovereign debt notes, promissory notes, treasury bills or any other instrument in which he has an interest or with the 27th, 28th and 29th defendants, in the amount of $ 6,759,000 or its equivalent.

He prohibited the 27th, 28th and 29th defendants (CBN, Debt Management Office and Federal Ministry of Finance) from releasing sums or funds belonging to the 2nd defendant or in which the 2nd defendant has an interest of up to 6,759 $ 000 or its equivalent.

The judge further ordered the 3rd to 29th defendants to disclose under oath the total amount of money or funds in their custody belonging to one of the defendants.

The plaintiff claimed in his affidavit that the energy company won the bid to purchase 60% of the shares of the Ibadan and Yola power distribution companies following the privatization exercise. of the assets of the Power Holding Company of Nigeria (PHCN) in 2013.

She applied for and received a syndicated loan of $ 162,400,000 from Plaintiff, 2nd Defendant (formerly Skye Bank Plc), Diamond Bank Plc now Access Bank Plc, First City Monument Bank Ltd, Heritage Bank Plc and Keystone Bank Ltd (jointly referred to as the lenders).

The lenders also accepted the appointment of the 2nd defendant as agent of the facility to, among other things, ensure the repayment of the loan.

The plaintiff therefore disbursed the sum of $ 35 million to the 1st defendant to enable him to meet the purposes for which he needed the pooled funds.

The energy company was unable to complete the transaction on Yola Electricity Distribution Company (Yola Disco), due to the insurgency in the Northeast and it invoked the force majeure protection clause included in the agreements and demanded repayment of the amount invested by the federal government. Government.

During the month of March 2020, the federal government made the final payments of the refund (amount recovered) to the energy company and Polaris Bank.

“However, the remaining portion of the plaintiff’s share of said recovered sum has since been withheld by the defendants, in particular the 2nd defendant,” UBA told the judge.
The court adjourned until July 13 for the hearing of the notice motion.

Source link

Leave A Reply

Your email address will not be published.