Our attention has been drawn to various reports and advertisements by First Bank over the weekend purportedly proffering reasons why the banks should not comply with the orders of Hon Justice Deinde Dipeolu to lift the interim Mareva orders and other orders made on 30 December 2024, claiming they have appealed the ruling of Justice Dipeolu in the dispute between FBN and GHL over FBN’s non-compliance with its obligations.
The purported appeal filed by FBN and the motion for injunction/ suspension of the discharge order are another incidence of gross abuse of process.
Therefore, compliance with the order is a completed act and does not need any further steps, as FBN erroneously claimed. In law, you cannot injunct a completed act.
Secondly, the order discharging the Mareva is declarative. In law, a declarative order cannot be kept or suspended, particularly after it has been obeyed. This is another instance of desperation by FBN and its lawyers, either by deliberately misinterpreting extant court rulings, suppressing facts for the court, or generally misinforming the general public.
These orders were set aside by Deipeolu J., primarily because FBN had deliberately withheld material facts about an existing order of court made by Allagoa J., restraining FBN from approaching the courts (or any other forum) to enforce the facility agreement between FBN and GHL pending the arbitration between the parties which was initiated almost two months before FBN had approached Dipeolu J. for the interim Mareva orders.
It is essential to let you know that court orders are valid and enforceable upon pronouncement and do not require more to come into effect. Therefore, the order of Dipeolu J. lifting the Mareva orders is the status quo between the parties concerning accounts maintained by GHL, its directors and shareholders with the banks.
FBN has also falsely informed the public that they have filed a notice of appeal against the orders of Dipeolu J. lifting the Mareva orders, together with an application for injunction/suspension of the discharge order. We want to let you know that at the time of this publication, no notice of appeal or motion for an injunction has been filed by FBN against the discharge orders of Dipeolu J. If they have been filed, they have not been served on GHL.
It is pertinent to mention that even if these court processes had been filed and served on GHL, they would not have the effect that FBN has deliberately, again, misrepresented to the public. This is so because no positive court orders have been made regarding these court processes to bind the banks or GHL.
Overall, it is safe to say that these publications were made without appropriate legal advice, and we urge the public to disregard them.
In the interim, the arbitration process initiated by GHL about FBN’s noncompliance with its obligations, upon which it declared profit from a loss position I. 2021/2023, is ongoing, and GHL remains committed to participating in that process and bringing this dispute to a logical conclusion.
