• Your client owing Honeywell N72.3b, Olanipekun insists
• Bank vows to appeal court judgment
Counsel to Ecobank Plc., in the alleged Honeywell debt recovery saga, Mr. Kunle Ogunba, yesterday, dragged the law firm of Wole Olanipekun & Co. before the Chief Justice of Nigeria (CJN) and the Body of Benchers.

Ogunba urged the NJC and BoB to probe the law firm’s role in the matter of “Shares belonging to Honeywell Group Ltd, Honeywell Flour Mills Plc, Anchorage Ltd, Siloam Global Services Ltd and Dr. Oba Otudeko in FBN Holdings Plc or in any other entity.”

He accused Wole Olanipekun & Co. of, among others, “unprofessionalism/abuse of the final judgment of the Supreme Court” and “persistent and constant abuse of process of court.”

Ogunba, in the July 18 letter, also addressed to the Managing Director, FBN Holdings Ltd., claimed the law firm filed a fresh action to relitigate the matter of Honeywell’s debt already settled by the Supreme Court.

But in a swift response, Wole Olanipekun & Co., said it disagreed with the petitioner’s petition. In a letter to Ogunba signed by David Adewumi and Quam Bisiriyu, the law firm maintained that Ecobank is indebted to Honeywell Flour Mills Plc., following the judgment of the Federal High Court, which was delivered on July 18, 2023.

“We do not agree with the contents of the said letter and reiterate the succinct points in our letters of July 10, 2023 and July 14, 2023, the substance of which have been largely undenied; especially as enumerated in our letter of July 14, 2023.

“Please, be further advised that, by a judgment delivered by the Federal High Court on July 18, 2023, in suit No FHC/L/CS/1554/2018 – Honeywell Flour Mills Plc v Ecobank Nig. Ltd., Ecobank is a judgment debtor to Honeywell Flour Mills Plc in the definite sum of N72, 291,990,705 expressly contained in the said judgment,” the firm stressed.
MEANWHILE, Ecobank Nigeria Limited, yesterday, announced plan to appeal the judgment by the Federal High Court in Lagos, which favoured Honeywell Flour Mills and ordered the bank to pay N72 billion.

The bank said it believed the judgment was perverse and would not stand the test of time. It vowed to put up a vigorous challenge, confident that higher courts would reverse the verdict.

A source within the bank said the instant suit was an action filed in 2018 for enforcement of the bank’s undertaking as to damages, in pursuance of its winding up petition and ex-parte orders granted in favour of the bank.

“We challenged the action through a notice of preliminary objection dated October 16, 2018, whereby we challenged the jurisdiction of the Federal High Court, as (among other reasons), the action did not fall within the provisions of Section 251 (d) of the Constitution, being that the subject matter of the suit was for the claim of damages arising out of an ex-parte order, as opposed to a banker-customer relationship.

“Trial was concluded in this matter since March 9, 2021 and the parties adopted their final written addresses alongside our notice of preliminary objection on March 16, 2022. The court then adjourned the matter to May 27, 2022, for judgment. While the court failed to deliver judgment on the said date, the registrar of the court promised to inform counsel whenever the judgment was ready.”

“In the wake of the Supreme Court’s decision in the bank’s favour, in suit No SC/CV/210/2021, which was delivered on January 27, 2023, the bank further filed a motion on notice dated March 9, 2023, to dismiss the suit on the grounds that same has become academic as a result of the judgment entered in favour of Ecobank, wherein the Supreme Court held that Honeywell remained indebted to the bank.

“The court heard a motion dated March 9, 2023, and adjourned to June 23, 2023 for ruling on our two applications and also for delivery of judgment. The court consequently delivered the said ruling/judgment today, July 18, via a virtual proceeding at about 4:00 p.m. In its judgment, the court dismissed the two applications we filed, holding that it has jurisdiction to entertain the suit and also that the suit had not become academic.”

According to the bank, in reaching its judgment, the court ignored/refused (among others): submissions showing that the ex-parte order were discharged on points of law and not that it was frivolously obtained by the bank; that the ex-parte order lasted for less than two weeks, contrary to the claim of Honeywell, which was said to have covered the period of three years; that the documents presented by Honeywell particularly the yearly returns did not show the alleged damage, hence same was indeed non-existent; that documents from various other banks who were served with the ex-parte order showed that the Honeywell companies were indeed highly indebted to them, hence there was no way the ex-parte orders would have frozen funds in the said banks; and more importantly, the court refused all the objections regarding the documents maliciously prepared by Honeywell for the sole purpose of instituting the suit and claiming unjustifiable sums from the bank.

The bank reiterated that it is a member of the Ecobank Group, the Pan-African Bank, which is proudly and fully committed to transparency in all countries where it operates, and abides by laws and regulations. It believes that the matter should be conclusively determined, in line with the applicable judicial process.