₦airaland Forum

Racoon:
https://www.tvcnews.tv/full-list-name-constituency-of-rivers-pdp-lawmakers-who-did-not-defect-to-apc/

Hmmmmm! The checkmate is clear. Someone is losing grip faster than I can imagine. It's like a plan without power to power it's hydraulics, falling out of the sky into a corn field while firmly believing it's landing on the run way. 26/27 will tell if the Emperor is landing on the tarmac or busting into flames in Rivers State.

The master strategist is simply keeping his joker to his chest.

All is well.

Damn! The worst thing that can happen to a law enforcer is to be docked?

Revealing! It shows the loyalty was transactional. Very human like.

Supreme Court Faults Unity Bank over Unlawful Account Blockage, Upholds ₦35m Damages Award

The Supreme Court has upheld the decision of the Court of Appeal affirming a High Court judgment that ordered Unity Bank Plc. to pay 16% pre-judgment interest on over ₦700 million deposited by a customer called Eforce Interservice Ltd, as well as ₦35 million in general damages for illegally blocking the company’s account and dishonouring multiple payment instructions.
The apex court dismissed Unity Bank’s appeal in its entirety, holding that the bank had no contractual basis to place a lien on the customer’s funds.

Background: ₦700m Deposits Blocked, Business Opportunities Lost

Eforce Interservice Ltd was a corporate customer of Unity Bank, operating current account No. 0023648377. Between 26 March and 29 April 2015, the company paid in and transferred a total of ₦700,037,240.23 into the account.

But when the customer issued payment instructions, the bank repeatedly refused to honour them. These dishonoured instructions cost the company several business opportunities for which the funds had been earmarked.

Feeling aggrieved, Eforce sued the bank, seeking declarations, injunctions, interest, and monetary damages. Unity Bank counter-claimed and brought in two additional parties, Lodigiani (Nigeria) Ltd and another director, on the basis of an earlier failed loan negotiation involving them.

The Failed Property Deal behind the Dispute

Lodigiani (Nigeria) Ltd, the 3rd respondent, owed Unity Bank an outstanding loan secured by three properties. One of Lodigiani’s directors, Alhaji Musa Usman, also served as Managing Director of Eforce.

To facilitate settlement of Lodigiani’s debt, Eforce offered to buy the three properties. To show good faith, Eforce deliberately funded its account with large deposits, hoping the bank would agree to a final settlement figure.

However, negotiations broke down. The condition attached to Eforce’s offer that payment would be based on “any amount agreed with Unity Bank by Lodigiani” was never met. Therefore no agreement was reached.

Despite this, Unity Bank unilaterally treated the ₦700m deposited by Eforce as a lien for Lodigiani’s indebtedness, and froze the customer’s account. After several attempt to resolve the issues without any headway, the sustomer sued Unity Bank to court.

Trial Court: No Contract, No Lien, No Justification

After full trial, the High Court held:

• There was no valid contract between Eforce and Unity Bank regarding Lodigiani’s loan repayment.
• The bank therefore had no legal right to treat Eforce’s deposits as security for another company’s debt.
• Blocking the account and dishonouring payment instructions was illegal and unjustifiable.

The court awarded:

• 16% pre-judgment interest on the ₦700m from 4 July 2016 until judgment,
• 10% post-judgment interest, and
• ₦35 million general damages for loss of use of funds.

Unity Bank appealed to the Court of Appeal and lost. It then went to the Supreme Court.

Supreme Court Decision: Appeal Dismissed

Delivering a unanimous judgment, the Supreme Court affirmed the rulings of the two lower courts and addressed several key legal principles.

1. No Contract without Offer and Acceptance

The court reaffirmed the basic elements of a valid contract: a clear offer and an unconditional acceptance.
Eforce’s offer was conditional and never accepted. Because the condition agreement between Unity Bank and Lodigiani was never fulfilled, no contract ever came into existence.
The bank therefore had no legal basis to seize or restrict Eforce’s funds.

2. Companies Have Distinct Legal Personalities

The court emphasized that a limited liability company is legally distinct from its shareholders and directors.
Even if Eforce and Lodigiani shared a director, this did not merge their identities. Their obligations could not be interchanged.
Unity Bank committed a “mischief” by assuming it could hold Eforce liable for Lodigiani’s debt.

3. Bank–Customer Relationship Was Breached

The Supreme Court held that Unity Bank violated its duty by:
• placing an unlawful lien on a customer’s funds,
• failing to honour valid transfer instructions,
• depriving the customer of the use of its money for years.
This wrongful interference entitled Eforce to both interest and damages.

4. Damages for Dishonoured Instructions Are Liquidated by Law

Relying on Section 57 of the Bills of Exchange Act, the court held that once a bank dishonours a payment instruction, the damages due are liquidated meaning fixed by law and must include:
• the amount in issue,
• interest from the date of dishonour or maturity, and
• expenses such as protests or related actions.
Because Unity Bank breached these statutory obligations, the damages assessed by the trial court were valid.

5. Meaning of Liquidated Damages

The Supreme Court explained that liquidated damages refer to sums pre-determined by the parties or fixed by statute as compensation in case of breach.
This applied squarely to the case under the Bills of Exchange Act.

6 & 7. No Basis to Disturb Concurrent Findings

The apex court reiterated its longstanding principle:
It will not disturb concurrent findings of the High Court and Court of Appeal unless there is a glaring error or miscarriage of justice.
Unity Bank failed to show any such exceptional circumstance. The findings below were sound, consistent, and fully supported by evidence.

Final Outcome

The Supreme Court dismissed Unity Bank’s appeal, confirming:
• 16% pre-judgment interest on ₦700,037,240.23
• 10% post-judgment interest
• ₦35m general damages
• And that the bank acted unlawfully by blocking the customer’s account without any contractual or legal basis.

I am wondering and still wondering.

Why this topic?

Why are folks that are due for marriage still single?

Why are married folks seeking divorce and why are the divorced folks regretting their new found status and hopping from bed to bed in search of the love they once sought after in marriage?

And lastly, why are some dark on feminists who have lead may astray, secretly getting married or having babies out of wedlock in a desperate hope to trap their baby daddy?

Why why why

martinskelly:
I was once addicted to gambling and alcohol, if I don't drink my belly can't accommodate food. I drink to eat if u understand what I am saying.
Addiction is spiritual, it can be feeling, it can also be an habit or even hereditary. However you want to describe addiction is up to you but the only person that can stop you from addiction is basically YOU!.

One thing I know about addiction is that, you are going to be seeing sign of stopping it when is long over due either through people, intuition, books, environment, tragic stories etc... And if you ignore those signs and pretend as though is nothing then you are inviting bigger trouble that will cost you a lot, I am talking from experience.
So when you are really ready to stop it you will stop it.

It takes more than will power. It takes understanding.


In all thy getting, get wisdom, knowledge and understanding.

Nothing lasting, works without a perfect or substantial understanding of these trinities.

Will power is the first step no doubt, but having faith is the most important. And faith will never come without wisdom, knowledge and understanding of the peculiar circumstances.

Kelpat7464:
I'm married with 2 kids,I'm in debt of 2m,I'm confused and tired,I feel like running away,I'm Soo confused,I wish God can send help my way before I take wrong decision, presently I'm jobless,but I'm doing laundry for someone

The question is what can you do?

If you knew what to do what will it be?

And how do you begin?

Times answers all things. 1 Samuel 38.

Go read it and listen to these two tapes by Pst. Sam Adeyemi

1. Winning over discouragement
2. Real Money series.
You can add the parable of the dollar.

Now, let me ask you this question?

How much money did God have, when he created the Heavens, the Earth and all this is within or beneath them?

Your problem is not lack of money. You have money all around you. I can small it.

You biggest problem, is the fact that you do not believe in your self.

Also, you do not have a plan and you wish that you will pray down a Benz.

Wishes are not horses. You can DM and we can talk more if you wish to figure out a way to get out of debt. I will offer it free if you are ready.

Shalom.

Emmy000seun:
Bro if you get familiar with drug levels, you will know all of them have their peak, like from weed (regular), Skonk(Sk), loud.(Ghana and Canadian loud)...all of this have their top level and once you get there you will need to promote to the next level..all this drug I mention above, if you are used to it then colos can never makes you misbehave exception is if you take it in excess..but I concur to the fact that if colos is been taken for long time it can tamper with ones sense of reasoning..
It was over hyping that makes me fall in love with it, like if my guys are taken it they will be like don't take it ooo, 😂 😂 na colos, so the day I took it I told myself that since my years of smoking different kind of weed, how will I b scared of it..but I only take like 3 puff and see how it goes with me, but nothing abnormal happened, infact I drove home perfectly that day..but what I observed is just 4 to 5 puff of it equivalent to taking a full wrap of loud..and colos was 500 naira, while a small cup of loud goes for 1,5 to 2k depends on the area I source for it..so colos save a little fund, but the intakes makes me feel so full of myself, and a slow reaction to every action..but I always cautious tho, like avoid fight, argument only enjoyment vibe..😂😂..I can state it categorically that smoking is another world entirely, may God help us fighting such addiction to overcome 🙏🙏

Isolation is what it is giving to you. The calmness you desire and a way to escape.

What is common with this?

When a lion wants to hunt for a buffalo or an elephant when very hungry, the sane tactics is applied. Isolate, degrade and kill off.

Hopes this rings a bell?

Happy rationalization. You shall soon find out your demons are the ones fucking you and not you enjoying the sex.

Shalom.

Addiction is just like every other demonic encounters.

Ever seen a man in bed with his many demons?

They keep him comfortable. Oh! very very comfortable. He has the opportunities to rationalize his many vices and beastly actions or inactions until these vices and the likes, daily define who he truly his. There is not day he won't live without them. The wishes of his many demons must be satisfied daily. They become his nature and habits are second nature. Hence, killing another, to one, is just like smoking a stick of cigarette to another. One demons desires the smoke daily, regardless of how damaging it might be to your original values and mission, less not mention your internal organs.

At least, the quicker your internal organs fails and ends you, the quicker you are gone from this realm without the opportunity to satisfy or fulfill the very mission that brought you here to begin with. There are a few exceptions anyway. Those who the True Master genuinely cares about. They are 2 out of a 100. So, what are the odds for you?

The demons load such a man with immerse comfort and everything he wants or desires. But then there is always a catch. They take for a payment, the things that are of most value to him, but he does not seem to understand or fully value their true worth. Until it is too late.

But by the time such a man understands the entire dynamics of the deal and exactly what he was/is paying in return for the pleasure or worthless things, becuase they truly become worthless and return to their original possessor at the very end, it is too late. Well, except for the very few I mentioned earlier.

Most men on this road, ends up losing themselves, everyone around them, including those they love most, and everything they got in exchange for them. And if they are unlucky, they loose their body and Soul altogether.

Quite a fantastic deal with the Master strategist, right?

These demons are certainly not the bad guy, the men that trade with them knew exactly what they bargained for. But many never truly ask for the details of the deals that comes in very fine prints like that software contract you never read before clicking i do.

If this guy's pocket is loaded, most naija women will ignore the HIV status and sleep with him without protection. Some go even marry am self.

Emmy000seun:
Thanks for your response..how and where can I download it??..mind you I don't have much time to go through long story tho due to work!! Only a very short story I will appreciate..but I need to just get away with smoke..am 32 now by God's grace and I've been smoking since 2009.. that's whopping 16yrs😭😭..tho I stopped interval thanks to me wife and also ambition to live exemplary life for the kids too(3), but since 2023 I travel away from my family I start again and where I work even if I don't buy with my money people must buy through me and they must definitely give me..my partner at work too is an addict..so the trends continues and the smoking journey is a journey you can see the end because you keep on taking and taking, each day desire to smoke and no restrictions, nobody so close to help in such process..may God help me through my decision..thanks once again

You will never be able to quit 100%. Especially if you used it for stress management. What will certainly happen is that you will get to a point that if you do not want it, you won't do it.

So, there are days you will still smoke. Maybe once i 5 years or 10 years or just like that.

www/thriftbooks/com/w/two-ways-washington-heights-drug-dealer-turns-around_salvador-sabino/1190217/#edition=5815827&idiq=7169397

It's cheaper with that link.

Emmy000seun:
May God help us..this your write up was on time.. infact I'm trying to get rid of smoking..I just need to stop it..it's been a very long time attitude..and the place I work now makes everything looks simple and isolated if I don't smoke..I pegged 2026 resolution to it tho..like from jan1 I want to make sure I totally stopped it.. couple with this message I know God won't come from heaven and talk to someone.. happy new month and remain blessed..

Let's begin this journey. If you visit the doctor today and he tells you that you will suddenly drop dead if you take another smoke within the next 7 days, you won't touch it. Or let's imagine you are arrest by the police today and thrown into a cell were you are unable to smoke for the next 3 weeks, your least worry will be the desire to smoke. Your priority in both instances will be staying alive and your freedom from jail.

Ever wondered why?

I will leave you with this book to help with the Spiritual aspect. Two Way Street by Salvador Sabino. Get it, read it and revert .

Thanks

First, you must come to the understanding that all addictions are spiritual. Regardless of their names, they all report to one Master. You will never know because science will tell you otherwise.

But one thing is certain on why these kinds of charade never works, Even Master Jesus said so. First, you must deliver yourself.

Same was said by Teacher Bob Nesta Marley " none, but ourselves, can free our minds". I shall say no further.

Salvation and redemption are personal. All you might need are teachers, prophets and guides. But none of them can do much more.

They all have a beginning and there is nothing that has a beginning that does not have an end.

The question is when do you want it to end?

You might still be thinking about it. While you are at it, lets be honest with ourselves. If you do not end that addiction, it will end you. And when it ends you, it will stop.

So, why not end it before it ends you?

State and Community Police will solve this problem once and for all. These Bandits are not ghosts. They are from these villages.

Holladoyheen:
Person go post orisirisi madeup unworking theories and quickly use 5 of his alts to like the posts.
Mehnnn the hustle is real.

Why do you think so?

horpe132:
.
.
Define "paraphernalia" ... The OP is mainly asking about blood work & physical body features

kindly read in between the lines and use google for the answer you see. You can operate a phone. Don't be afraid to learn a new thing today. Thanks

horpe132:
..
.
No, you cannot be prosecuted without being caught with the hard drugs physically...... Unless court order asking for your blood work so as to tie you to a crime.... Outside that, you're good....

In case of job application, you cannot be arrested, you can only be disqualified for the job,,

, in case of physical features you mentioned, there's no law tie-ing anyones physical features to drug test with reasonable suspicion on a crime

You can. If you are caught with the paraphernalia. It will 100% corroborate knowingly using. Na you go come dey come explain to the Federal Judge wetin such items wen dem take dey do drugs dey do for your possession.

Absolutely. But they likely won't waste resources on you or such a person. Why?

While the law criminalizes possession and usage, they will have to prove that you knowing got the drugs into your system. That is, you knowingly used it and that was how it got into your system. Na them the legal work dey.

So, unless they want to shakara you or punish you, there is no point. But if the gods are after you, they might have your time and prosecute, knowing fully well that it is 50/50. Especially if you have an exceptionally crazy litigator as your defense counsel.

The problem is sourcing cheap cars. Teach people that and your business would flourish. Especially those working class folks that need side cash. This could be soft business for them with the right plugs.

SUPREME COURT BLASTS DELAY TACTICS, AFFIRMS VALIDITY OF 2008 WRIT IN 17-YEAR-OLD CASE AGAINST FIRST BANK

By Amebo Lawyer, Esq. | Abuja | November 17, 2025

SUPREME COURT BLASTS DELAY TACTICS, AFFIRMS VALIDITY OF 2008 WRIT IN 17-YEAR-OLD CASE AGAINST FIRST BANK

In a scathing judgment that underscores the judiciary’s growing intolerance for technical delay tactics, the Supreme Court has unanimously dismissed First Bank of Nigeria Plc’s appeal challenging the validity of a writ of summons issued 17 years ago.

The apex court held that the writ, filed in 2008 by Mr. Asikpo at the High Court of Akwa Ibom State, was perfectly valid under the Civil Procedure Rules that applied at the time—even though it did not bear the signature of a legal practitioner.

The 17-Year Journey of a Case Yet to Begin

The legal battle began in April 2008 when the respondent filed suit No. HT/25/2008, seeking declaratory and monetary reliefs against First Bank.

After several interlocutory applications, the trial court granted permission for an amendment, and an amended writ was properly filed in July 2009.

But before the trial could begin, First Bank raised a preliminary objection, arguing that the initial writ was invalid because it lacked the signature of the respondent’s lawyer, and that the amended writ could not cure the alleged defect.

The trial court dismissed the objection. The Court of Appeal agreed. First Bank then brought the matter before the Supreme Court, which has now shut the door firmly on the bank’s argument.

Supreme Court: Registrar’s Signature Alone Was Required

The Supreme Court pointed to Order 5 Rule 15 of the 1989 Akwa Ibom High Court Civil Procedure Rules, which clearly states that a writ is issued once it is signed by the registrar, nothing more.

Justice Abubakar, JSC, emphasised that the rules did not require a lawyer’s signature on the writ. The writ carried the name of the respondent’s legal practitioner, was prepared properly, and was issued by the registrar, the only requirement the law imposed in 2008.

“What is missing,” he said, “is a requirement that did not exist in the rule under which the writ was born. Ex nihilo nihil fit, nothing comes from nothing.”

Justice Ogunwumiju, JSC, reinforced that the new 2009 Civil Procedure Rules—which introduced the requirement for lawyers’ signatures—**could not apply retroactively** to invalidate a process filed the previous year.

Court Warns Against “Judicial Legislation”

The Court further rejected First Bank’s reliance on the popular Okafor v. Nweke and SLB Consortium v. NNPC precedents.

Those cases, the justices explained, dealt with breaches of explicit, mandatory provisions requiring legal practitioners’ signatures on pleadings. In contrast, the 1989 Rules governing this case imposed no such burden.

The Court cautioned against inserting obligations into procedural rules that the legislature never contemplated.

“Courts do not set traps for litigants,” Justice Abubakar warned. “To impose obligations retroactively would render unlawful that which was lawful at the time it was done.”

Evidence Act Cannot Override Civil Procedure Rules.

The Court also dismissed reliance on Section 91(4) of the Evidence Act, noting that it governs the evidentiary value of written statements, not the validity of originating court processes.

A writ of summons, the justices stressed, is not a factual document requiring proof of authorship but a formal command of the court notifying a defendant of a claim.

“Justice Delayed Is Justice Denied”: Lords Rebuke 17-Year Delay

Perhaps the strongest language in the judgment came from the Justices’ condemnation of the interminable delays caused by technical objections and interlocutory appeals.

Justice Abubakar lamented that the case filed in 2008 had not yet been tried on the merits:

“This prolonged litigation undermines public confidence in the judiciary… Endless interlocutory applications stall the wheels of justice.”

Justice Ogunwumiju went further, describing the delays and technical manoeuvres as “not good enough” and calling out the “shenanigans” deployed in the lower courts.

Justice Okoro described the appeal itself as *“unnecessary”, stating bluntly that it had served no useful purpose but to waste judicial time, emphasising that the appellant could still have challenged jurisdiction after judgment in the substantive suit.

“Justice delayed is justice denied,” he reminded counsel.


Key Legal Principles the Supreme Court Reaffirmed

A writ is valid once it has been signed by the court registrar under the rules applicable in 2008.

Courts cannot introduce requirements not contained in the rules.

Subsequent amendments to court rules do not invalidate processes filed in compliance with earlier rules.

Procedural rules are handmaids of justice, not instruments of sabotage.

Interlocutory appeals should not be weaponised to delay justice.

iLegendd:
People don't pay attention to details cuz of greed. Those of us that do, it's as if we talk too much, but we're just messengers.

If you pay attention, 12 months ago or thereabout, we called yellow top at 108k to 109k. That 17k (109 + 17 = 126k) you saw is just extra to keep hopium alive so that big names will sell — distribution.

If you look at the image below, the green dotted line is the 40th week starting from halving while the red is 80th week, the end of the halving cycle.

Did you notice something? The red line broke down at exactly 109k, which is yellow top. It's not a coincidence, but calculated. They're done with their arithmetic, so it's time to slowly go home while giving you occasionally rallies that won't except 115k max.

So, that range of 108k to 109k and maybe, wick up to 111k will be the region BTC will retest in first week of January, then dumps and go again in March (though lower) to bring back hopium and people will start calling for "super cycle." It's a trap, don't fall for it.

I pay too much attention to details and history— na him be my problem.

Are you saying we are going to the 74k support/ resistant zone in 2026? What will this mean for those who deal mainly on Sol?

etokhana:
https://punchng.com/convention-four-pdp-governors-storm-ibadan-as-inec-signals-boycott/

But there two rulings as of this time. Federal says it should not hold. And an Oyo State High Court says it can go on.

We need a uniform non-multiplicity of subject matter cause of action at the High Courts. Whether State High Court or Federal High Court. Once a matter is filed in any of the court, whether Federal or State, no other High Court or Judge should preside over the same subject matter.

I guess that is the only way forward. It will help maintain sanity, especially in Political matters.

Ruke1991:
So both hired lawyers for high court, appeal court and supreme court because of N48k debt. How much did the lawyers charge? How much was spent on transport and hotel bills?

I think the guy who went to court to recover 48k didn't need the money. He only wanted to teach his dishonest friend and debtor a lesson

And the friend had an Ego problem. Well! Sometimes, litigating is not about speaking grammar or winning cases. Or, in fact, showcasing your legal dexterity.

It's about forging the best possible outcome for your client. As a debt management expert, I have seen instances where there is a judgment against a debtor with an award of monthly interest of 3 or 5%, depending on the judgment.

Rather than settle and nip the rolling interest on the board, the counsel for the judgment debtor will rather choose to appeal on technical grounds, knowing fully well that no court will ask a debtor not to repay the money he/she took as a loan and benefited from. At best, a re-trial will be ordered.

By the time they are done at Appeal, a loan that was a few couple of thousand or millions has compounded, further complicating the problems of the debtor.

But then, what do I know?

What you see here is the principal element. The accrued interest and ancillaries are not captured. The cumulative sum might shock you.

SUPREME COURT BACKS EFCC: SEIZURE OF 15 CARS WAS LEGAL, NOT A RIGHTS VIOLATION

By Our Legal Correspondent

The Supreme Court has upheld the powers of the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) to temporarily seize property during investigations, dismissing a fundamental rights appeal by a car dealer whose 15 vehicles were taken from his sales lots in Abuja.

In a unanimous judgment in Olakehinde v. EFCC (2025) 17 NWLR (Pt. 2014) 241, the apex court ruled that the anti-graft agency acted within the Constitution when it confiscated the cars while probing an alleged ₦80 million money-laundering trail linked to Niger State Government funds.

Car Dealer Cries Foul

The appellant had approached the FCT High Court under the Fundamental Rights Enforcement Procedure, accusing EFCC operatives of invading his premises without a warrant and carting away vehicles he displayed for sale.

He maintained that neither he nor his company was under investigation and that no invitation was ever extended to him. He claimed the seizure violated his constitutional rights to property under sections 43 and 44 of the 1999 Constitution.

He sought several declarations and damages, insisting the EFCC acted illegally.

EFCC Fires Back: “The Cars Are Proceeds of Crime”

The EFCC countered with a detailed affidavit, stating that the vehicles were seized during a probe into massive laundering of public funds from Niger State.

According to the Commission, over ₦80 million of the diverted money traced through various bank accounts ended up in the appellant’s possession. Investigators said the cars were actually owned by the principal suspect in the laundering scheme, not the appellant.

The EFCC also stated:

* The appellant was invited but refused to honour the invitation.
* A key aide of the principal suspect identified the vehicles and led operatives to the lots.
* Nine of the seized cars were found at a location belonging to the suspect’s son.
* Bank documents and witness statements linked the appellant to the funds.

With no further affidavit from the appellant to challenge these claims, the trial court dismissed his case. The Court of Appeal affirmed the decision.

Supreme Court: “Temporary Seizure Was Lawful”

The Supreme Court agreed with both lower courts, holding that the appellant failed to prove any violation of his rights.

Key points of the ruling include:

Search Without Warrant Not Always Unconstitutional: While section 37 protects privacy, section 45 allows lawful restrictions for public safety and investigation

Property Rights Not Absolute: Under section 44(2)(k), law enforcement may temporarily take possession of property during investigations.

EFCC Had Reasonable Suspicion: Money traced to the appellant provided “specific and articulable facts” justifying EFCC’s actions.

Applicant Bears the Burden: A fundamental rights claimant must present credible evidence of a violation, which the appellant failed to do.

The apex court stressed that the concurrent findings of the High Court and Court of Appeal were “cogent and unassailable,” and there was no miscarriage of justice.

Counsel Rebuked for Scandalising the Court

In a notable part of the judgment, Justice Saulawa sharply criticised the appellant’s lawyer for accusing the Court of Appeal of “prevaricating,” a term the Supreme Court described as tantamount to scandalising the court.

The justice reminded counsel of his duty to maintain decorum, honesty, and respect in the “hallowed temple of justice,” warning that lawyers who denigrate courts risk professional misconduct sanctions.

Bottom Line

The Supreme Court held that the EFCC acted within the scope of its statutory powers. The appellant did not show that his fundamental rights were breached. The appeal was dismissed in its entirety.

By Amebo Lawyer, Esq. | Abuja| 15 November 2025

The Supreme Court has overturned decisions of both the Aba High Court and the Court of Appeal, which had granted a stay of execution to a judgment debtor on the ground that he was too poor to pay.

In the case of Nwabueze v. Nwosu (1988) 4 NWLR (Pt. 88) 257, the apex court held that impecuniosity alone is not an “exceptional circumstance” that can justify halting the enforcement of a valid judgment.

The Loan, the Judgment and a Sudden Plea of Poverty

The dispute began when Mr. Nwabueze sued to recover ₦48,125.56, a friendly loan he said he had given to Mr. Nwosu at the latter’s request. The Aba High Court agreed and ordered repayment.

But the same day he filed his appeal, the defendant also applied for a stay of execution, claiming he was too financially strained to both pay the debt and pursue the appeal. He blamed a poor economy and a struggling haulage business.

Despite listing several assets capable of satisfying the judgment, he insisted that immediate payment would cripple him.

Shockingly, the trial court agreed.

Lower Courts Focused on Poverty — Supreme Court Says That Was Wrong

The Court of Appeal upheld the stay, reasoning that forcing the debtor to pay might “frustrate his constitutional right of appeal.”

But the Supreme Court disagreed and rebuked both courts for misdirecting themselves.

Justice Obaseki, delivering a key portion of the unanimous judgment, stated bluntly:

“The desire to exercise one’s constitutional right of appeal, without more, is not a vital consideration in granting a stay. Poverty simpliciter is not an exceptional circumstance.”

Courts Must Protect Judgment Creditors, Not Shield Debtors Without Cause

The justices stressed that a successful litigant is entitled to the fruits of his judgment, and a stay should only be granted where there are truly exceptional circumstances, such as:

* when execution would destroy the subject matter of the appeal,
* or leave the appellate court helpless,
* or make a return to the status quo impossible if the appellant later succeeds.

None of those applied in this case.

Justice Craig added:

“The court will not give with one hand and take away with the other.”

And Justice Uwais noted that having assets to satisfy a judgment is not a reason to delay execution; it is a reason to refuse a stay.

Appeal Allowed, Judgment to Be Enforced

The Supreme Court concluded that neither the trial court nor the Court of Appeal exercised discretion judicially and judiciously. They relied on irrelevant claims and ignored established principles.

The stay was therefore set aside, clearing the way for the creditor to finally enforce the judgment.

The ruling reinforces a long-standing message:

A judgment debtor cannot simply cry “I’m broke” to avoid paying. Exceptional circumstances, not sympathy, control the law.

fergie001:
I seriously miss my Ibadan days.

Quoting Section 251 of the Constitution, Mr Adetumbi contended that INEC does not fall within the category of agencies that place the case exclusively before the Federal High Court. He asked the court to dismiss the objection and proceed with the substantive suit.

He is very correct.

Lifu v. Ibadan Judge. Wike v. Makinde. Interesting times.