Home Business Court rejects objection Zenith bank’s in Pinnacle Communication’s N1billion suite against ICPC

Court rejects objection Zenith bank’s in Pinnacle Communication’s N1billion suite against ICPC

By Our ReporterJan 31, 2020, 19:39 pm0

1010

… Imposes N100,000 fine against Zenith Bank

Justice Taiwo Taiwo of the Federal High Court, Abuja, on Friday dismissed a preliminary objection by Zenith Bank challenging a suit filed by Pinnacle Communications Ltd (PCL) against the Independent Corrupt Practices and other related offences

Commission (ICPC), and the commercial bank.

Pinnacle Communications had in July 2018, dragged ICPC and

Zenith Bank to court for unlawfully withholding its money domicile

in the bank without a valid court order, and consequently, is claiming N1billion damages against the agency.

Delivering ruling on the objection of Zenith Bank (2nd defendant),.the court said the application lacked merit, was frivolous and incompetent.

Justice Taiwo held that Okey Ojukwu, counsel to the commercial bank ought not to have filed the preliminary objection in the first place because the December 14, 2018, judgement of Justice

Nnamdi Dimgba, which voided and nullified the freezing of

account of Pinnacle Communications domicile in the bank was explicit and unambiguous.

Ojukwu had in the preliminary objection of the bank claimed that.the action it took by withholding the account of PCL was a “lawful

act”.

Justice Taiwo said the objection by the bank was filed out of

misconception and only amounted to a waste of the court’s precious time.

“The application of the second defendant is an invitation to this court to sit on appeal on the decision of my learned brother Dimgba J. of Dec.14, 2018.

“This court, with all due respect to the second defendant shall not

fall into that error.

“The application is not only incompetent and an abuse of court process, it is one brought without carefully and painstakingly

understanding the ruling my learned brother gave on the

interlocutory injunction”, Justice Taiwo held.

Consequently, the Judge reasoned that “This type of application should be discouraged by the court and counsel, and to discourage counsel from filing such frivolous application, the court

must come down hard on counsel who filed such applications either on their own or on the instruction of their client”.

“I therefore find no merit in this application and it is accordingly dismissed having held that the application is frivolous, time wasting, incompetent and an abuse of court process.

“I shall fail in my duty as a judge if I do not award cost. Therefore, I award N100,000 against the second defendant in favour of the

plaintiff” Justice Taiwo stated.

By the suit marked

FHC/ABJ/CS/779/18, Pinnacle

Communications is seeking “A declaration that the act of the 1st defendant (ICPC) in ordering the 3rd defendant to place a “post-

no-debit” restrictions on the plaintiff’s account with the 2nd

defendant without any court order and or any valid court order is

ultra vires, unlawful, injurious, unconstitutional and a breach of the

plaintiff’s right to its movable property.
The plaintiff is also seeking, “A declaration that the act of the 2nd

defendant in placing a “post-no-debit” restrictions on the plaintiffs

account number 1012875804 with the 3rd defendant without any

court order and or any valid order is unlawful, injurious,

unconstitutional and a breach of the plaintiff’s right to its movable

property.

More so, PCL wants, “A declaration that the failure of the 2nd

defendant to right the wrongful act of the first defendant in

ordering a “post no debit” restrictions on the plaintiff’s account

with the 2nd defendant without a valid court order is unlawful,

illegal, unconstitutional and a breach of the plaintiff’s right to its

movable property.

Furthermore, the plaintiff is seeking “An order of perpetual

injunction restraining the defendant from placing any restrictions

on plaintiff’s account with the 2nd defendant without a valid and

competent court order.

“An order of perpetual injunction restraining the 1st defendant

from placing any form of restrictions on the plaintiff’s account with

the 2nd defendant and or any other bank or financial institution in

which the plaintiff maintains any account and or dealings, without

a court order and or valid and competent court order.

“An order for the payment of the one billion naira as general,

exemplary and punitive damages against the defendant for their

unlawful and illegal act.