GHL directors are demanding $1 billion in damages from First Bank following the federal high court’s decision to lift the freezing orders on assets.
GHL directors, who were adversely impacted by the ex parte freezing order, have initiated legal action globally against First Bank, seeking $1 billion in damages each for defamation and the wrongful freezing of their accounts.
The lawsuit stems from a dispute over $225.8 million.
The court ruled in favor of GHL, setting aside the injunction after accepting arguments from the company’s counsel, Abiodun Layonu, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), and Olumide Aju, SAN, who represented the 2nd to 5th defendants.
The judges found that the Mareva order had violated a prior ruling from a court of concurrent jurisdiction.
Layonu argued that the injunction was an abuse of the court process, asserting that First Bank had misled the court by failing to disclose a prior order from Justice Lewis-Allagoa, which had prevented the bank from taking further action.
He contended that the asset freeze had caused significant financial harm to GHL and its directors.
The dispute originates from a loan arrangement between First Bank of Nigeria Limited, a subsidiary of First Bank Holdings, and GHL, along with related entities like GHL 121 Ltd, Aimonte Nigeria Limited, and Schlumberger Nigeria Limited.
On December 12, 2024, a court order prevented First Bank from enforcing loan recovery measures until arbitration proceedings were concluded.
However, First Bank pursued an ex-parte order against GHL and 15 other entities, resulting in the asset freeze.
GHL and its co-defendants contested the injunction, claiming it was obtained through fraudulent misrepresentation and the concealment of key facts.
They argued that had all the relevant facts been presented to the trial judge, the order against them would not have been granted.
The trial judge agreed with GHL’s arguments and, as a result, set aside the freezing order.
