The Nation Newspaper

Tag: Ecobank Nigeria Limited

  • Ecobank makes 50% repayment for $300m Eurobond issuance

    Ecobank makes 50% repayment for $300m Eurobond issuance

    Ecobank Nigeria Limited says it has made 50 per cent repayment for its  $300 million 7.125 per cent Eurobond Senior Notes due 2026.

     The repayment aligns with the bank’s ongoing tender and exit consent solicitation in respect to the facility.

    In a statement, the bank explained that on July 8, it demonstrated strong liquidity and financial resilience by repaying 50 per cent of its Eurobond ahead of the scheduled maturity in February 2026.

    As of July 11, 2025, the bond traded near par at $99.00, reflecting strong investor confidence in the bank’s ability to repay at maturity.

    The early repayment was necessitated by improved liquidity position, backed by collections from loan repayments and early redemption of its promissory notes from its parent.

    The bank has firm liquidity plans in place to ensure the remaining 50 per cent of the Eurobond is repaid in full at maturity. Additionally, the bank used the opportunity to require bondholders’ consent to remove the capital adequacy ratio from its Eurobond covenant.

    Read Also: Buhari served Nigeria with integrity, deep love for his people — First Lady

    In 2024, the bank’s capital adequacy ratio (CAR) declined to 7.65 per cent, slightly below the 10 per cent regulatory requirement for a national bank. This drop was driven by the depreciation of the Naira, which impacted its loan portfolio with significant foreign currency exposure. However, the bank has come up with measures aimed at restoring the CAR to its regulatory limit.

    Notably, Ecobank Nigeria is undergoing a transformation aimed at boosting revenue, fast-tracking impairment provisions to support loan write-offs, strengthening asset quality, and aggressively cutting operating expenses through improved efficiency. Discussions with key bank stakeholders revealed that the transformation program is starting to deliver positive results.

    Preliminary first half 2025 results show a 30 per cent revenue growth, rising to N113.7bn from N87.6bn in first half of 2024.

    Gross impairment charges surged by over 200 per cent in H1 2025, reaching N32.8bn compared to N10.7 billion in H1 2024, due to improved revenue. Unaudited profit before tax for H1 2025 rose by 90 per cent to N13.5 billion, up from N7.1 billion in H1 2024 and the liquidity ratio has remained sufficiently above the required 30 per cent.

    A key pillar of the transformation program, the asset quality war room, has driven a more aggressive push in loan collections and recoveries. Also, the improvement in oil production, driven largely by the current administration’s initiatives, has significantly strengthened the bank’s recovery prospects, particularly given its large exposure to oil and gas loans, and has improved obligors’ ability to meet restructuring terms.

    Consequently, in 2025, the bank recovered $6 million (over N9 billion) from a long-standing delinquent obligor. Additionally, stage 2 loans totaling over N170 billion have been successfully reclassified to stage 1, reflecting consistent performance over the past 12 months.

    The parent company (Ecobank Transnational Incorporated -ETI) remains committed to supporting the bank. The parent had injected over $10 million in 2024 to enable the bank to meet the CBN’s requirement of N200 billion for a national bank. However, additional capital injections, alongside measures like loan portfolio reduction, accelerated impairment provisioning, and improved profitability, are underway to restore the bank’s capital adequacy ratio (CAR) to regulatory levels.

    The bank remains committed to complying with the CBN’s forbearance directive and will not issue dividends or management bonuses, ensuring that retained earnings are preserved to strengthen its capital base.

    An analyst noted that while the Bank faces challenges in meeting its Capital Adequacy Ratio (CAR), “he remains confident that the ongoing transformation will steer the Bank out of the woods. He added that if investors lacked confidence in the bank’s ability, the bond would be trading at a discount — not near par”.

  • Court orders N1.086b payment to ex-bank employees

    Court orders N1.086b payment to ex-bank employees

    The National Industrial Court, Lagos Division, has ordered Ecobank Nigeria Limited to pay N1, 086,611,589.11  to 1,742 ex-staff of Oceanic Bank who were denied their entitlements.

    Justice R. A. Gwandu gave the order in a judgment in suit NIC/LA /231/2012 filed by the former employees of defunct Oceanic Bank, which merged with Ecobank  Bank Limited in 2012.

    Babajide Bayode, Yemisi Adesote, Adeboyejo Oladimeji, Seun Aina, Yusuf Kadiri, Segun Alasan, Adetayo Familugba and Lolade Olaribigbe sued for themselves and as representatives of 1,733 other ex-employees.

    The representative action suit was filed by their counsel Mr Nwabu Okoye.

    They sought “an order directing  Ecobank Nigeria Limited to pay the outstanding sum of N1,146,470,393,.62 being the sum total of their savings in the Staff Savings Investment Trust Fund, SSITF, scheme contributed by 1742 ex-employees of  Oceanic Bank made up of those transfered to Ecobank upon merger of the two banks through the merger of February 15, 2012, and those whose employment were determined before or upon the said merger which remain unpaid till date”.

    The claimants said the amount outstanding as their contributions to the SSITF scheme, which the defendant (Ecobank) refused to pay to date, stands at N926,901,065,.60.

    Justice Gwandu dismissed the bank’s counter-claim on the ground that it failed to put credible evidence before the court.

    The judge held that upon the consummation of the merger, Ecobank fully acquired all the assets and liabilities of Oceanic Bank and could not repudiate or push some of the liabilities on its employees, more so when it was the bank that was in control of the SSITF scheme.

    Read Also: Lagos court nullifies statutory marriage in favour of Islamic union

    The judge held that Ecobank cannot deny that there were contributions to the  SSITF or show evidence that the claimants were paid the sum they claim.

    “I therefore, hold that the claimants have proved their case and are entitled to the payment of the sum of N926,901,065.60 being the sum total in the account of the  Staff Savings Investment Trust Fund being contributions of 1,742 ex-employees of Oceanic Bank made up of those transferred to Ecobank upon the merger and whose contract of employment were determined on February 15, 2012 and those whose employment otherwise were determined before or upon the merger,” Justice Gwandu held.

    On unpaid gratuities, the judge held: “I hold that the defendants are liable to the claimants in the sum of N159,710,523.51 being the total sum due on the basis of years of service of the employees.”

    The claimants had also asked for an order directing Ecobank to pay the sum of N159,710,523.51, being the total sum due as gratuities to 48 of the claimants and another sum of N59, 858,804.51 being the short payments of severance or redundancy paid by the defendant to 74 of them.

    The court was further asked to grant an order directing the bank to pay 22 per cent interest per annum on the sums of money being claimed from February 15, 2012, until judgment and thereafter at the rate of 12 per cent per annum until the liquidation of the judgment sum.

    Ecobank through its lawyer, S.C. Arubike filed a statement of defense to the suit as well as counter-claim.

    It demanded N967,529,765.38 being the excess of severance and or redundance benefits paid to the ex-staff of Oceanic Bank, at 24 per cent interest from October 30, 2014, until any judgment is delivered in its favour and interest of 10 per cent until fully liquidated.

    Justice Gwandu refused the plaintiffs’ claim of N59,858,804.51 being the total sum of short payment of severance or redundancy package paid by Ecobank to 74 of the claimants.

    The judge said it would be unfair for the court to hold Ecobank responsible for any lapses that may have occurred under the agreement brokered by ASSBIFI since some of the ex-staff benefitted under the agreement and are happy under the same agreement moreso the intervention of ASSBIFI had the consent of the ex-staff.

    The court granted 10 per cent interest on the judgment sum from 30 days after the judgment was delivered till it was fully liquidated.

    Play at real money casinos

  • Court stays proceedings in Honeywell’s suit against Ecobank

    The Federal High Court in Lagos has suspended the hearing of a N5.5billion debt case between Honeywell Flour Mills Plc, its sister companies and Ecobank Nigeria Limited.

    The companies are praying the court to hold that they are not indebted to Ecobank.

    Justice Mohammed Idris adjourned pending the determination of an interlocutory appeal filed by Ecobank.

    The bank appealed against the judge’s refusal to recuse himself from the case.

    When the case came up for continuation of defence, the bank’s lawyer, Mr Divine Agbua, told the judge that the Court of Appeal directed him to suspend further hearing.

    He said: “The appeal filed by the defendant came up for hearing at the Court of Appeal. Judgment was reserved. They made a directive to await their decision. May I apply that this case be adjourned sine dine (indefinitely). We shall notify your lordship upon delivery of judgment by the Court of Appeal.”

    Plaintiffs’ counsel Olabode Olanipekun confirmed that the Court of Appeal directed that the case be halted “out of respect for the hierarchy of courts.”

    “My application would be for the court to adjourn, not sine dine, but till a further date for us to report the outcome of the appeal,” he said.

    Ruling, Justice Idris said he would comply with the appellate court’s directive.

    He held: “I have listened to learned counsel. I have read the orders of the Court of Appeal. It is clear that the Court of Appeal had directed this court to await its judgment on this matter out of respect for the hierarchy of courts.

    “As a trial court, subordinate to the Court of Appeal, this court shall abide by the orders made by the Learned Law Lords of the Court of Appeal. This court shall, therefore, await the judgment of the Court of Appeal in this matter before further proceedings are continued herein.

    “In the circumstances, further proceedings in this matter are hereby adjourned pending the determination of the appeal. Either party shall be at liberty to apply for a hearing at the conclusion or the delivery of judgment by the Learned Law Lords of the Court of Appeal. This shall be the decision of the court,” the judge ruled.

    Ecobank had asked Justice Idris to recuse himself because it no longer had confidence in the judge to do justice in the case.

    The judge had refused the application, saying he would stick to his judicial oath in determining the case.

    His words: “It is always tempting for a judge against whom criticisms are made to say he would prefer not to hear further proceedings in which the critic is involved.

    “But it is important for a judge to resist the temptation to recuse himself simply because it’ll be comfortable to do so. The danger is that we’ll soon reach a position in which litigants were able to select judges to hear their cases simply by criticising all the judges that they do not want to hear their cases, whether the criticism is justified or not.

    “These issues are either for the appellate court or appealable issues and the defendant can exercise the right of appeal if it so desires. The application for the judge to recuse himself from this matter is most frivolous and it is refused,” he said.

    Ecobank subsequently appealed against the ruling.

    Read Also: Honeywell Flour Mills revenue hits N53.27b

     

     

  • N5.5bn debt: Drama as billionaire businessman Otudeko testifies

    N5.5bn debt: Drama as billionaire businessman Otudeko testifies

    There was mild drama at the Federal High Court in Lagos Thursday as chairman of Honeywell Group Dr Oba Otudeko escaped arrest by responding to summons to testify in his companies’ N5.5billion debt suit against Ecobank Nigeria Limited.

    Sporting his trademark Yoruba attire, Otudeko and his aides tried to prevent journalists from taking his photographs and videoing him as he left the court.

    There was also mild drama inside the courtroom as plaintiff’s counsel Olabode Olanipekun and Ecobank’s lawyer Divine Obinna Agbua repeatedly clashed.

    There were arguments between the lawyers on whether he could be examined, cross-examined and re-examined on his statement on oath.

    A scuffle broke out between some of Otudeko’s aides and journalists covering the proceedings.

    As his aides walked beside him out of the courtroom, they beat a quick retreat to the back of the building on sighting a TV camera.

    Otudeko tried to escape through the back gate but the camera man was ahead of them.

    The Honeywell chief and his group stood at a safe distance from the camera, but the TV reporter and cameraman stood at both exit points of the court premises. The move left Otudeko and his aides plotting the best means of escape.

    Some of the business mogul’s aides confronted the cameraman, asking him: “Why are you doing this?” while shielding their boss.

    There was a mild scrap when one of the aides tried to force the cameraman to stop recording the scene.

    Otudeko succeeded in leaving the court at about 11.40am in-between his aides who shielded him from the cameraman.

    On Wednesday, Agbua had told Justice Mohammed Idris that Otudeko ignored a court summons, which Otudeko denied.

    He said while in the witness box Thursday: “This is a first experience, and I am extremely delighted to be here to see all professionals in practice. I was away from Lagos, and only got a call from my officers who informed me of the position, and I came back yesterday (Wednesday).

    “I have great respect for the institution of the court, and so I have deposed to my witness statement and have filed it.”

    Agbua asked Otudeko to tell the court his names, occupation and address. The witness replied: “My name is Dr Oba Otudeko. I am a businessman. My place of business is at No 6, Mekuwen St. Ikoyi Lagos.”

    When asked about his professional qualification, Olanipekun objected, saying the proper practice was for the defence to lead the witness to adopt his written deposition.

    He added that the defence could not embark on a journey of questions, adding that after adoption, the plaintiff counsel was entitled to cross examine the witness.

    Agbua argued that the witness was a subpoened one, and so he was entitled to lead his witness in evidence without hindrance.

    “The witness in question is our witness. The question I put to the witness being an introductory question is allowed under the law, where he lives, works, his qualifications. To that extent, I submit that the objection to my line of questioning is preemptory,” he said.

    Justice Idris ruled overruled Agbua and held that the witness could only be led to adopt his witness statement.

    Agbua then declined to lead the witness to adopt his statement.

    During cross examination, Olanipekun asked the witness to tell the court: “Whether the then Managing Director of Ecobank was in attendance at the plaintiff’s office on July 23, 2013, when it was agreed that N3.5billion will be full and final settlement of the plaintiff’s debt.”

    Before the witness could respond, Agbua objected, arguing that since the witness’ statement was not before the court, he could not be made to answer questions on it.

    “We have gotten what we want and we do not want to lead the witness anymore. We hereby apply for his discharge,” Agbua said.

    Olanipekun made repeated efforts to cross-examine Otudeko, but Agbua continued to insist that a witness whose statement was not adopted in court could not be cross examined.

    Justice Idris adjourned until February 14.

  • Ecobank seeks to appeal ruling in bankruptcy case against Otudeko

    Ecobank seeks to appeal ruling in bankruptcy case against Otudeko

    …. Honeywell Group chair opposes application

     

    Ecobank Nigeria Limited has applied to the Court of Appeal in Lagos for extension of time to enable it seek leave to appeal a ruling by Justice Babs Kuewumi of the Federal High Court in Lagos in a winding-up petition against chairman of Honeywell Group, Oba Otudeko.

    The bank initiated the bankruptcy proceedings against Otudeko over an alleged N5.5billion debt by virtue of loan facilities availed Honeywell Flour Mills Plc, Siloam Global Services Limited and Anchorage Leisures Limited, said to have been personally guaranteed by Otudeko.

    The appellant is seeking an order by the Appeal Court granting it leave to appeal the ruling delivered last February 19.

    The ruling followed the winding-up petition filed by Ecobank on October 17, 2015, accompanied by motion ex-parte and motion on notice.

    The bank said the petition was a bid to recover the money from Otudeko “considering  the looming and impending danger of having its banking licence withdrawn after the respondent failed to liquidate its indebtedness after several demands.”

    Justice Okon Abang, who first handled the case, asked the bank to put the respondent on notice to show cause. After being put on notice, Otudeko filed a motion on notice seeking to dismiss/strike out the petition.

    Justice Kuewumi, who took over from Justice Abang, ruled that he would accord higher priority to Otudeko’s motion on notice ahead of other pending applications.

    Dissatisfied with the ruling, Ecobank appealed. The Court of Appeal, last October 21, struck out the appeal on the basis that the appellant did not first obtain leave of the lower court before appealing.

    The bank is, therefore, seeking for reliefs to enable it invoke the Court of Appeal’s jurisdiction to entertain the appeal.

    “The applicant (Ecobank) ran out of time to appeal as a result of the previous proceedings in suit no CA/L/227/16 which was not determined on the merit as a result of failure to procure the needed leave.

    “The leave of this court is required to extend time to obtain leave of court to appeal the ruling of lower court. It is in the interest of justice that this application be favourably considered and granted accordingly,” the bank prayed.

    The bank, through its lawyer Mr Kunle Ogunba (SAN) is seeking a receiving order against Otudeko’s estate, funds, investment and shares in Honeywell Group, Honeywell Flour Mills, among other companies, as well as an order declaring him bankrupt.

    Ecobank prayed for an order commanding Otudeko to immediately avail it the companies’ statement of affairs as well as net worth and other credible financial details as required by the Bankruptcy Act.

    It asked for a consequential order empowering the bank to sell Otudeko’s properties wherever they are situated, as well as an order enabling it to utilise the investments or shares in companies in which Otudeko has interest.

    In a motion on notice, Ecobank, among others, is also seeking an interlocutory order appointing a special manager and receiver over Otudeko’s assets.

    But, Otudeko, in its counter-affidavit sworn to by Omolade Adeyemi, has urged the Court of Appeal to refuse Ecobank’s application.

    He said the bank had prosecuted the subject-matter of the appeal and judgment had been given in which the Court of Appeal upheld his preliminary objection and struck out appeal.

    The respondent said the appellate court also attended to the appeal on its merits, considered arguments by parties and affirmed the correctness of Justice Kuewumi’s ruling.

    “It is in the interest of justice to refuse the applicant’s application,” Otudeko said.

    In the lower court, the Honeywell Group’s chairman said the alleged debt “is neither ascertained nor undisputed.”

    He added that Honeywell Four Mills and its sister companies commenced a suit against the bank before another judge “owing to disagreements between it (Honeywell) and the respondent (Ekobank) as to the complete liquidation of their outstanding obligations to the respondent having regards to the terms and condition of the credit facility.”

  • Court appoints provisional liquidator for Temple Energy

    Court appoints provisional liquidator for Temple Energy

    The Federal High Court in Lagos has made an interlocutory order appointing its Chief Registrar as provisional liquidator of Mettle Energy and Gas Limited.

    Justice Jude Dagat made the order based on application by Ecobank Nigeria Limited.

    Mettle Energy has, however, filed a notice of appeal to challenge the order.

    The court ordered the Chief Registrar to take charge and custody of all identified/traceable assets, properties, funds in banks and other financial institutions belonging to Mettle Energy.

    The provisional liquidator is also to take over moveable and other traceable assets of the respondent within Nigeria pending the hearing and final determination of Ecobank’s winding-up petition.

    Justice Dagat made a consequential order of interlocutory injunction restraining the energy firm’s directors or employees from tampering with its funds in any bank, until the winding-up petition is determined.

    The judge, in the January 17 order, also barred Temple Energy and its agents from alienating or dissipating its assets, including machinery and tools of trade, pending the hearing and determination of the petition.

    The respondent and its directors were also barred from interfering with or disturbing the provisional liquidator.

    Ecobank, through its lawyer Kunle Ogunba (SAN), said it availed Temple Energy facilities which it allegedly failed to repay.

    The bank filed a petition, following which the respondent proposed and executed a terms of settlement after protracted negotiations.

    “Despite the magnanimity/concessions extended the respondent leading to the terms of settlement, the respondent failed, refused and/or is unable to comply with the repayment plan duly covenanted,” the bank said.

    In the terms of settlement, it was agreed that Mettle Energy would pay N245million out of a debt of over N781million.

    Ecobank is praying that the company be wound up in line with sections 409 (1) and 410 (1) and (b) of the Companies and Allied Matters Act, Cap 20, 2004.

    But, Mettle Energy has filed a motion on notice for stay of execution of the order pending the hearing and determination of its appeal against the ruling.

    The respondent also sought an order restraining the Chief Registrar from acting as the provisional liquidator.

    In its appeal, the respondent said the judge erred in making the order because there was no valid advertisement of the respondent’s petition for winding-up.

    Justice Dagat adjourned till February 28.

  • Honeywell vs Ecobank: Judge refuses to disqualify self

    Honeywell vs Ecobank: Judge refuses to disqualify self

    …Won’t compel disclosure of story’s source

     

    Justice Mohammed Idris of the Federal High Court in Lagos Friday refused to disqualify himself from adjudicating a N5.5billion debt case between Honeywell Flour Mills Plc, its sister companies and Ecobank Nigeria Limited.

    Ecobank’ had written the Chief Judge, Justice Ibrahim Auta, asking that the case be re-assigned to another judge.

    The bank said it no longer had confidence in the judge to do justice.

    Praying the court to recuse himself from adjudicating the case, Ecobank’s lawyer Mr Kunle Ogunba (SAN) said his client had several reasons to believe that it would not get justice from the judge.

    “The court’s rules allow My Lord to transfer the case on his own. This is the first time we’re asking in this suit that the case be re-assigned,” Ogunba said.

    Ogunba said the application to transfer the case was not an attack on the judge’s integrity.

    “Since a party has shown that it does not harbour the confidence in your Lordship to handle the case dispassionately, your Lordship should wait on the CJ to respond or for My Lord to recuse himself so that parties can go before any other judge. This is our client’s grievance.

    “Their (plaintiffs’) conduct has been as if they own the court. It accords with the best judicial tenets for your Lordship to await the CJ’s decision or recuse himself,” Ogunba said.

    But Honeywell’s lawyer Bode Olanipekun argued that Ecobank’s application was a ploy to delay the case.

    “It’s an application to stymie, waylay and ambush proceedings. This type of application portends very grave danger to the judiciary,” he said.

    According to him, if Ecobank had any issues with the judge’s rulings, it ought to go on appeal.

    “This application is not based on any law. I urge your Lordship to dismiss the application,” Olanipekun added.

    Ruling, Justice idris refused to recuse himself from the case. He said he would stick to his judicial oath in determining the case.

    His words: “It is always tempting for a judge against whom criticisms are made to say he would prefer not to hear further proceedings in which the critic is involved.

    “But it is important for a judge to resist the temptation to recuse himself simply because it’ll be comfortable to do so. The danger is that we’ll soon reach a position in which litigants were able to select judges to hear their cases simply by criticising all the judges that they do not want to hear their cases, whether the criticism is justified or not.

    “These issues are either for the appellate court or appealable issues and the defendant can exercise the right of appeal if it so desires. The application for the judge to recuse himself from this matter is most frivolous and it is refused.

    “This court shall abide by the decision of the Honourable the Chief Judge whenever it is made. The application is refused and the matter shall proceed accordingly.”

    The judge earlier refused Olanipekun’s application to compel this reporter to step into th dock and disclose the source of his report on Ecobank’s letter to the CJ. The story, published in the Tuesday edition of this newspaper, was based on the letter.

    Olanipekun said: “We only got hint of that application by a publication in The Nation of November 15, 2016 in an article authored by one Joseph Jibueze. Coincidentally, he is in court. I take this issue very seriously.

    “I refer to the National Judicial Council (NJC) policy on complaints against judicial officers. Section 2.2 (4) to section 2.2 (9) bars any party from leaking any allegation of judicial misconduct against any judge in the press.

    “May I apply that Mr Jibueze comes into the dock to tell the court how he came about the story. Let him tell us the origin and how he came to know about it.”

    Ogunba, who spoke in the journalist’s defence, describing Olanipekun’s application as “bizarre”.

    He said: “This application is shocking. Mr Jibueze is not a party to this suit. On what basis will he enter the dock? Olanipekun has not cited any rule of procedure that allows that. Mr Jibueze did not report what was not in existence. I urge my Lord to discountenance my learned friend’s application.”

    In a short ruling, Justice Idris asked Mr Olanipekun to “drop” the application and to “leave Mr Jibueze out of it”.

    Justice Idris said: “I urge counsel to drop it. Let’s leave Mr Jibueze out of it. Let’s leave Mr Jibueze alone. Let’s leave Mr Jibueze and go to the substance. We’ll leave the press out of it. They’re doing their work.”

    The judge said his attention was also drawn to the story, but that he was not surprised by Ecobank’s letter to the CJ.

     

    He said: “I was asked: ‘have you read the report?’ I said: ‘What matter?’ They said: ‘Ecobank.’ I said I expected that they would write the DSS (Department of State Services). I expected that they would write the EFCC (Economic and Financial Crimes Commission).

    “I expected that they would write the ICPC (Independent Practices and other related offences Commission). I expected that there would be a sting operation in my house on Monday the 14th of November. I expected and I was waiting. And I am waiting.

     

    “I said it on the last date and I’m saying it today: Nobody, no matter who you are can threaten me. Nobody, no matter who you are can intimidate me. Idris can never be intimidated. Never! This is a court a court of law. You don’t do politics in Justice Idris’ court.

     

    “No matter how rich you are, you can’t influence Justice Idris – no matter how powerful you are. Keep your money in your pockets. Don’t come here with your money, I’ll not accept it. Keep your influence where they are, you cannot influence Justice Idris whoever you are. I’m saying it openly and I am declaring it.

     

    “Let’s go to the issues. I’m prepared. Justice idris is prepared. Ogunba SAN knows me very well in practice. So let’s leave the issue of Jibueze. Let’s go to the substance. We’ll leave the pressmen out of it. We do law in this court. Let’s talk law.”

     

    The judge adjourned until December 1 for hearing.

  • Ecobank asks CJ to re-assign Honeywell’s suit to new judge

    Ecobank Nigeria Limited has asked the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court, Justice Ibrahim Auta, to re-assign a suit filed against it by Honeywell Flour Mills Plc and its sister companies – Anchorage Leisures Limited and Silaom Global Services Limited – to another judge.

    The bank said it no longer had confidence that it would receive a fair justice from Justice Muhammed Idris who is currently handling the case.

    In a letter to the CJ by the bank’s Company Secretary/Chief Legal Counsel Denike Laoye and Kehinde Dawodu of its Legal and Regulatory Unit, the bank said various events led it to conclude that the case should be better handled by another judge.

    “The bank states unequivocally that it no longer has confidence that it will fairly and dispassionately receive justice in the subject case in light of the various events showing the court’s apparent bias against the bank and its retained firm of solicitors.

    “We, therefore, sincerely pray that the subject suit be re-assigned to any other judge of the Federal High Court, Lagos,” the bank wrote.

    The bank said while ruling on contempt a contempt charge filed by Honeywell and others, the judge allegedly threatened to the “deal with” the bank when the plaintiffs’ counsel properly invokes the court’s disciplinary jurisdiction.

    “In determining the initial committal processes, His Lordship Idris J, went beyond the possibility of innocence or the presumption of innocence as required by law,” the bank said.

    The bank said the judge, without hearing from it, held that a ruling delivered on July 1, in which he refused to grant the bank’s application for stay of proceedings, was still pending.

    Besides, Ecobank said the judge allegedly refused to countenance its appeal before the Supreme Court and a pending motion for stay of proceedings.

    “Our senior counsel informed the court that in deference to the hierarchy of courts, particularly since the issue at hand is jurisdiction, His Lordship ought to adjourn the trial pending the decision of the Supreme Court on the same issue, which appeal is ripe for hearing.

    “Despite all these, His Lordship relied on the plaintiff’s sole affidavit and the ruling of 1st July, 2016 to adjourn for definite hearing the subject suit, shutting the bank out from traversing the narration by the plaintiffs’ counsel,” the bank said.