Sanusi weighs in on Ecobank vs Otudeko saga

Sanusi Lamido Sanusi, former governor of the Central Financial institution of Nigeria, has affirmed that the ruling of the Bankers’ Committee concerning the contentious situation between Ecobank Nigeria Restricted and Honeywell Group over an alleged N5 billion debt nonetheless stands.

Sanusi mentioned the Bankers’ Committee, performing as a consensus-based physique, has the authority to make binding choices for banks.

“The Bankers’ Committee by consensus, generally, makes binding rulings for banks. All of the banks undergo its choices. It acts nearly like an arbitral court docket however no it’s not a court docket,” he mentioned.

Highlighting the importance of the committee’s rulings, Sanusi mentioned that bankers themselves perceive their guidelines and practices higher than the courts, making the committee’s choices broadly revered and adopted throughout the banking sector.

“Nonetheless, this can be a ruling by friends that every one are likely to abide by as a result of these items go round. Bankers truly know their very own guidelines and practices higher than the courts,” he mentioned.

The dispute between Ecobank Nigeria and Honeywell Group over the alleged N5 billion debt appears to have been resolved as early as 2015, following the declaration by the Bankers’ Committee.

In response to a report from the committee’s Ethics and Professionalism sub-committee, the settlement for Honeywell to pay Ecobank N3.5 billion as a full and remaining settlement was deemed legitimate and ought to be honoured.

In response to a letter from Ecobank Nigeria, legal professionals representing Oba Otudeko clarified that the claims made about choices from the Supreme Court docket in case SC/CV/210/2021 on January 27, 2023, affirming the indebtedness of their consumer or Honeywell Group Plc had been false.

The legal professionals said, “The letter falsely alleges that there was a choice of the Supreme Court docket in SC/CV/210/2021 made on twenty seventh January 2023 ‘affirming the indebtedness’ of our purchasers and that the choice additionally ‘commanded,’ our above-stated purchasers to carry out sure acts, neither Dr. Oba Otudeko, CFR nor Honeywell Group Plc was a celebration to the Supreme Court docket resolution/proceedings and no order was made in opposition to them.”

They additional clarified that the particular quantity of N13,507,052,417.99 talked about in Ecobank’s letter was not a part of any court docket resolution or judgment in Nigeria or elsewhere.

“The sum of N13,507,052,417.99 (13 billion, 5 hundred and 7 million, fifty-two thousand, 4 hundred and seventeen naira, ninety-nine kobo) said in Ecobank’s letter is/was not contained within the Supreme Court docket resolution or any extant Court docket resolution in Nigeria or elsewhere. No order of the court docket has additionally awarded identical or any judgment sum (as debt owed) in any respect in favour of Ecobank as a legal responsibility from our purchasers or any of the Honeywell corporations.”

The legal professionals concluded that no court docket order has awarded such a sum as a debt owed by their purchasers, or any of the Honeywell corporations, in favor of Ecobank.

The Bankers’ Committee, within the June 26, 2015 report, with reference quantity ODA/FMA/BUO/1493, mentioned it acquired a petition that Ecobank was “making an attempt to renege on a settlement settlement” on amenities it granted to Anchorage Leisures Restricted, Siloam World Companies Restricted and Honeywell Flour Mills Plc.

The committee’s report, which was addressed to Ecobank’s managing director and chief government, mentioned “after a number of gives and counter gives with respect to the quantity for the settlement, the events agreed on the assembly of twenty second July 2013, involving your financial institution’s MD/CEO and the Honeywell Group chairman that Honeywell would pay the sum of N3.5 billion in full and remaining settlement of the indebtedness of the three corporations. It was additionally agreed that Honeywell would instantly proceed to pay the sum of N500 million as an indication of religion in direction of the settlement.”

In response to the report, Honeywell paid the agreed N500 million to Ecobank on July 23, 2013 and accomplished cost of the agreed N3.5 billion on January 10, 2014. Thereafter, the group requested for a letter of discharge from Ecobank.

Nonetheless, Ecobank in a November 14, 2014 letter to Honeywell Group, claimed that the N3.5 billion was a partial cost and that the settlement that the sum was in full and remaining settlement was an “in precept understanding”.

How it began

On July 23, 2013, Honeywell wrote to Ecobank accepting the phrases for the decision of the declare by the financial institution as agreed on the assembly held the day earlier and saying, “we verify our settlement to pay the sum of N3.5billion as full and remaining settlement of our indebtedness to your financial institution. As a part of the verbal settlement reached on the assembly, we will instantly pay the sum of N500 million in direction of the amenities. We suggest that the stability of N3 billion be paid in three equal half-yearly funds.”

That very same day, Ecobank despatched again a response during which the financial institution mentioned, “please word that the settlement was for a full and remaining cost of N3.5 billion to be partly paid instantly by – N500 million on Monday, July 22, 2013, and the stability to be paid instantly thereafter earlier than the CBN examiners go away the financial institution.”

The timing of the cost grew to become an enormous situation and this noticed each events shifting their wranglings to the court docket on October 16, 2015, through a go well with by Ecobank earlier than Justice Tsoho in search of to wind up Honeywell.

Nonetheless, each events started to get public consideration for his or her dispute after Ecobank secured an ex-parte movement to restrain Honeywell and Oba Otudeko from working their accounts in all banks and monetary establishments and an order directing their respective banks to furnish Ecobank with particulars of their accounts within the banks.

This identical bank-customer dispute was submitted to the subcommittee of ethics and professionalism of the Bankers’ Committee for adjudication and ruling was issued in favour of Honeywell, however Ecobank in a letter dated November 14, 2014, maintained that “throughout a current CBN/NDIC assessment of the financial institution, the accounts had been flagged and that the CBN had insisted that the quantity excellent be paid with out additional delay.”

On August 6, 2015, Honeywell filed a go well with earlier than Justice M. B. Idris during which it sought an interim injunction to restrain Ecobank from making any illustration suggesting that it owed the financial institution and on August 10, 2015, the interim injunction was granted and each events ordered by the court docket to keep up established order.

Following this, Ecobank filed a preliminary objection on the premise that the Federal Excessive court docket lacked jurisdiction to listen to the dispute and on December 11, 2015, the court docket presided by Justice Idris held that the Federal Excessive court docket had jurisdiction to listen to the matter. Ecobank instantly appealed this resolution.

On October 16, 2015, Ecobank filed two separate fits earlier than Justice Abang. On this identical day, Ecobank filed one other two petitions earlier than Justice Yunusa who on December 4, 2015, assorted the ex-parte orders by granting Honeywell Flour Mills restricted entry to its financial institution’s accounts permitting the corporate to take not more than N15 million weekly.

Learn additionally: Explainer: How Bankers committee dominated in favour of Otudeko in endless saga with Ecobank

On July 13, 2018, justices of the Supreme Court docket made two rulings, each in favour of Honeywell.

In a single, go well with quantity SC.401/2016, which was an enchantment by Honeywell in opposition to the ruling of a decrease court docket in favour of Ecobank, the justices within the ruling learn by Amiru Sanusi upheld the enchantment.

In one other ruling delivered by John Inyang Okoro, the Supreme Court docket justices reviewed an enchantment introduced earlier than them by Ecobank in relation to the judgment of the Court docket of Enchantment delivered on March 30, 2016, mentioned inter alia, “having resolved all 5 points in opposition to the appellant (Ecobank) , I maintain that this enchantment lacks benefit and is hereby dismissed. I affirm the choice of the court docket of enchantment delivered on thirtieth March 2016.”

In doing so, the Supreme Court docket justice mentioned, “actually, I’ve tried to grasp the grievance of the appellant on this situation nevertheless it seems to be the extra you look, the much less you see.”