The High Court of the Federal Capital Territory has declined Keystone Bank Limited’s application to extend an ex-parte Mareva injunction freezing several accounts linked to TAK Logistics Limited.
The order, originally granted on July 16, 2025, by Justice A. Akobi, expired by its own terms seven days later and was not renewed by the vacation judge, Justice Chizoba Oji, who found no compelling justification in law to entertain the matter as presented by the Claimant/Applicant.
The decision marks a pivotal turn in a matter the firm contends has been widely misrepresented in public discourse, particularly concerning TAK Agro Plc and its chairman, Mr. Thomas Akoh Etuh.
TAK Agro Plc’s lawyers argue that the company was not a party to the credit transaction at the heart of the dispute.
The company maintains that it was not a party to the credit transaction at the heart of the dispute.
It insists that the N24.9billion loan was granted in January 2021 solely to TAK Logistics under the Central Bank of Nigeria’s Real Sector Support Facility/Differentiated Cash Reserve Requirement (RSSF/DCRR) Scheme, with Keystone Bank acting as the financial intermediary.
It argues that TAK Agro Plc had no contractual obligation to Keystone Bank that had arisen in this matter, and that Mr. Thomas Etuh, who previously held a non-executive role on TAK Logistics’ board, had disengaged from that position well before the dispute arose.
It is the defendants’ position that neither TAK Agro Plc nor Mr. Etuh had any involvement in the administration or disbursement of the said facility.
Thus, they are querying why Keystone Bank chose to join both parties in a dispute with their customer for a loan that, in their view, had yet to reach maturity date.
They aver that as of July 2025, the company had already repaid N9.78 billion, approximately 40 per cent of the loan and that the facility has a tenor of seven years, with final maturity not due until 2028.
The defendants also claim that, though Keystone Bank filed its originating processes on June 18, 2025, these were not served on TAK Logistics until July 18.
According to them, TAK Agro Plc and Mr. Etuh were also not served until July 23, weeks after the ex parte injunction had taken effect.
On July 22, the return date fixed by the trial judge, Keystone Bank made a second ex parte application before a vacation judge, one day after the courts began their annual recess.
Read Also: CJN warns court’s support staff against compromising justice delivery process
This procedural manoeuvre could have prolonged the freezing orders without the knowledge or input of the affected parties.
However, TAK Logistics’ legal team, comprising Michael Kaase Aondoakaa (SAN) with A.T. Kohol, C.O. Nnaeto, Mathew Onoja, Atna Kuyembo, and Abdulbasit Shuaib, were present at the proceedings and successfully objected to this attempt.
The court agreed, declining to entertain the matter or to extend the expired injunction in the absence of credible evidence that the defendants posed a risk of asset dissipation.
The case is likely to come up again in September 2025 for the continuation of proceedings, once the court’s annual recess has ended.
