CASE TITLE: ALL STATES TRUST BANK PLC v. BIU COMMUNITY BANK LTD (2025) LPELR-80869(CA)
JUDGMENT DATE: 9TH APRIL, 2025
PRACTICE AREA: MARITIME AND SHIPPING LAW
LEAD JUDGMENT: UGOCHUKWU ANTHONY OGAKWU, J.C.A.
SUMMARY OF JUDGMENT:
INTRODUCTION:
This appeal borders on banking law.
FACTS:
This appeal is against the judgment of the Federal High Court, Maiduguri Judicial Division.
The provenance of this action is in the banker/customer relationship between the parties. The Respondent was the Appellant’s customer and maintained an account with the Appellant where it carried on banking transactions based on the instructions and mandate it gave to the Appellant. In the normal course of its business, the Appellant fell upon challenging times, and it became distressed and was wound up, consequent upon which the statutory liquidator, the Nigeria Deposit Insurance Corporation, became the liquidator of the Appellant Bank. In the discharge of its functions as liquidator, a letter was written to the Respondent with the demand that it was indebted to the Appellant in the sum of N16.03 million. The Respondent contested the indebtedness, and after a reconciliation of accounts, the demand on the alleged indebtedness was reduced to N10.9 million.
The Respondent still disputed the indebtedness and claimed that the reconciliation exercise revealed that there were illegal and unauthorized withdrawals and payments from its account amounting to the total sum of N39.07 million. In consequence, the Respondent contending that the Appellant was in breach of contract, the fiduciary relationship, and the duty of care owed to it arising from the banker/customer relationship between them, with the leave of Court, instituted proceedings before the Federal High Court, Maiduguri Judicial Division. Upon being served with the Court processes, the Appellant set up a counterclaim wherein it claimed the following reliefs:
The parties having filed and exchanged pleadings, the matter proceeded to a full-dressed hearing where the parties adduced testimonial and documentary evidence. The trial Court in its judgment, dismissed the counterclaim of the Defendant and granted relief to the Plaintiff.
The Appellant was dissatisfied with the decision of the trial Court, and it appealed against the same.
ISSUES FOR DETERMINATION:
The Court adopted the issues formulated by the Appellant, viz;
“1. Whether the trial Court, was right to have granted the Respondent’s claim for N39,073,711.52k when the Respondent failed to specifically plead the same with material particulars in its pleadings, especially as circumstances leading to the said debt border on fraud.
2. Whether the trial Court was right to have relied on Exhibit N and R5 to make a finding of admission of unauthorized debits, double debits, and wrong interest charges on the Respondent’s account.
3. Whether the trial Court was right to have dismissed the Appellant’s counterclaim without considering it on the merit and whether the same does not constitute a breach of the Appellant’s right to a fair hearing.
4. Whether the trial Court’s judgment is not against the weight of evidence in light of the Appellant’s oral and documentary evidence placed before the Court and whether the same did not occasion a miscarriage of justice.”
DECISION/HELD:
In conclusion, the Court dismissed the appeal.
RATIOS:
- ACTION- COUNTER-CLAIM: Whether the success of the plaintiff case will affect the counterclaim where the facts are interwoven
- APPEAL- INTERFERENCE WITH EVALUATION OF EVIDENCE: Duty of trial Court to evaluate evidence and ascribe probative value to same; when an Appellate Court will/will not interfere
- BANKING LAW- DUTY OF A BANK: Duty of a bank under its contract with its customer to exercise reasonable care and skill
- BANKING LAW- DUTY OF A BANK: Duty of a bank to exercise due diligence and care as not to release money (ies) from the account of a customer without formal instructions
- CONSTITUTIONAL LAW- RIGHT TO FAIR HEARING: Principles of fair hearing; when an allegation of denial of right to fair hearing will be held to be untenable
- EQUITY- PRINCIPLES OF EQUITY: Whether a party can benefit from his own wrong
- EVIDENCE- ADMISSION AGAINST INTEREST: Whether an admission against interest is the best evidence in favour of an adversary in a trial
- EVIDENCE- ADMISSION/ADMITTED FACT(S): Whether admission/admitted facts need further proof
- JUDGMENT AND ORDER- JUDGMENT OF COURT: How judgments should be read
To read the full judgment or similar judgments, subscribe to Prime or Primsol
