The hearing of the N20 billion suit of fraudulent conduct, negligence and incompetence against Zenith Bank PLC by a firm, Owigs and Obigs at the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) in Lugbe, Abuja, has been moved to 1st February, 2017.
This followed pleas by Zenith Bank’s Counsel, Samuel Zibiri (SAN) during a court session on Wednesday 7th December for an extension of time to allow him settle issues of which documents tendered by the Plantiff is acceptable to them.
While arguing for more time before Justice Angela O. Otaluka, Zenith Bank’s lawyer appealed under Order 33(1) of the court rules saying he needed time to produce some documents requested by the Plantiff. “We got notice to produce at 4pm yesterday (Tuesday 6th December) and we have to liaise with the Bank,” he said.
However, counsel to the Plantiff, Innocent Daagba objected saying the matter was slated for hearing that morning “and we came prepared. On our part, we have 52 list of documents we intend to tender,” he said.
But the judge eventually granted Zenith Bank’s request so that full hearing can commence in earnest at the next sitting and adjourned the case till February 1st 2017.
Recall that a Nigerian firm – Owigs and Obigs Nigeria Limited – had sued Zenith Bank Plc for N20 billion, accusing the bank of negligence, incompetence and engaging in fraudulent conduct, causing it (plaintiff) to lose a series of contracts for the supply of solid minerals worth over $64 million
In the suit marked: FCT/HC/M/6371/16 the plaintiff alleged that Zenith Bank, through its unprofessional handling of its (plaintiff’s) business caused it to lose the contracts in 2014 with Chinese company, King-Tan Tantalum Industry (KTTA) for the supply of solid minerals by an unauthorized withdrawal of $4, 486.04 from the plantiff’s Domiciliary Account thereby causing an immediate termination of the contract that should have triggered the second phase of the contract spanning for a period of three years with a value of ! $200m, only if the first phase was succesfully completed.
While It took the Bank 146 days to file a statement of Defence, it also failed after 196 days to produce the documents required of her which was to be relied upon for the trial. Owigs and Obigs had in the writs of summon deposed that the deliberate unauthorized removal of funds from its account by Zenith Bank caused the termination of the execution of a duly secured foreign contract valued at $64, 107,180.00. ( Sixty- Four Million, One Hundred and Seven Thousand, One Hundred and Eighty Dollars) after it had already committed for export $10 million worth of material goods as a part fulfilment of the contract term. The company averred that all attempts it made to get clarification from Zenith Bank as to why the contract was terminated and funds illegally withdrawn from its accounts was rebuffed by the bank.
Owigs and Obigs also said the unauthorized withdrawal contravenes the Banking and Other Financial Institutions Act 1991 and the Nigeria Deposit Insurance Act. Adding that she was forced to retrench 75 staff and shelf its plan of employing over 900 more hands. Consequently, the plaintiff therefore claims against Zenith Bank N2 billion as damages “for the loss of goodwill and further trading opportunities with the Chinese Chamber of Commerce/ International Chamber of Commerce of Asia and local suppliers of solid minerals as well as sundry/ collateral expenses incurred in securing and running three foreign contracts with Chinese companies but which were all lost as a result of the unilateral termination of these contracts by the defendant.”
Owigs and Obigs Nigeria Limited also seeks N1billion damages against Zenith Bank as aggravated charges. The plaintiff is equally seeking seven (other reliefs totalling $42, 961,739.88 ( about N17 billion at current rate) from Zenith Bank, including the $4, 486.04 (being money it unlawfully withdrew from the plaintiff’s Domiciliary Account without authorization from the plaintiff) causing the contract to be terminated.
It was learnt that Zenith Bank sequel to the legal action against her as contained in the plaintiff’s reply to defendant’s statement of defence filed on 02 Nov 2016, had instituted different rounds of negotiations with the Plaintiff after tendering an apology, but did not follow through on itss promises to indemnify the Plaintiff against all the incurred losses causing Owigs and Obigs to seek redress in the court of law.
cpcnews.org 