₦airaland Forum

chimex38:
They recently won an FG contract worth billions of dollars to build plant to produce RTV drugs for HIV patients.
Since US aids stopped.

https://www.healthcaremea.com/2026/03/05/fidson-healthcare-wins-usd6-2-billion-deal-to-boost-local-arv-production/

Agbalowomeri:
Most professors are poor

NSEstudent:
So Fidelity sold a property to a firm and court was pending the vacation of the occupiers.

The buyer sues Fidelity.

Court rules in favour of the buyer.

QUESTIONS

1. What delayed the issuance of an order to vacate by the court?
2. If ruling is yet to be made while the matter is still in court, are the buyers allowed to sue?

I am totally in support of the buyers here. I cannot buy your property and still be waiting to possess it for apparently indefinite period.

In a letter dated May 20, 2025, signed by Adeyinka Olumide-Fusika, SAN, of M.A. Banire & Associates/Citipoint (Legal Practitioners), the legal team asserted that Fidelity Bank significantly understated its liabilities by reporting only N2.274 billion as provisions for litigation and claims—despite an enforceable judgment of over $129 million against it as of December 31, 2024.


A legal firestorm has erupted over Fidelity Bank Plc’s 2024 Annual Report, as lawyers representing Sagecom Concept Limited have written a petition to the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN), accusing the bank of concealing a multi-million-dollar judgment debt under its litigation disclosures.


In a letter dated May 20, 2025, signed by Adeyinka Olumide-Fusika, SAN, of M.A. Banire & Associates/Citipoint (Legal Practitioners), the legal team asserted that Fidelity Bank significantly understated its liabilities by reporting only N2.274 billion as provisions for litigation and claims—despite an enforceable judgment of over $129 million against it as of December 31, 2024.


The petition, addressed to the Director of Banking Supervision at the CBN, calls for immediate regulatory scrutiny of Fidelity Bank’s financial reporting practices, which the lawyers allege were “blatant and deliberate misstatements and misrepresentations.”


Final Supreme Court Judgment Ignored

The contentious litigation, originally filed by Sagecom Concept Limited in 2011 (Suit No. LD/1734/2011), spanned over a decade and culminated in a Supreme Court ruling on April 11, 2025, in Sagecom's favour. The courts consistently ruled in favour of Sagecom at the High Court, Court of Appeal (Appeal No. CA/L/494/2018), and ultimately the Supreme Court (SC/CV/602/2021).
Despite these outcomes, Sagecom’s legal team said Fidelity Bank failed to reflect the liability accurately in its audited accounts. As of December 31, 2024, the judgment debt stood at $129,321,631.73, and due to compounded interest of 19.5% per annum, the amount had risen to $139,362,314.19 by May 20, 2025.


“By so doing, the impression was conveyed to its shareholders and the public at large that its liability on litigations and claims was reasonably within that range,” the lawyers said.


According to the petition, the “misrepresentation” conveyed the impression to shareholders and the public that Fidelity Bank's exposure was modest—just over two billion naira—when in fact it was over 90 times greater.


Alleged Media Manipulation

The letter also accused Fidelity Bank of attempting to control public perception through media spin and the top management of Fidelity Bank Plc of attempting to preemptively shape the narrative before enforcement actions commenced.


True to form, the bank released a follow-up statement titled “Fidelity Bank Clarifies Position on Court Judgment inherited from Defunct FSB International Bank”, portraying the judgment as an inherited liability dating back before Fidelity’s acquisition of FSB International Bank.


However, Sagecom’s lawyers insist the legal process was transparent and rigorous, and the claim that the matter is “inherited” does not absolve Fidelity Bank of legal and financial responsibility.


The CBN had earlier released a statement downplaying the issue, assuring stakeholders and depositors that there was “no cause for alarm” regarding Fidelity Bank’s operations. The CBN described the circulating reports as “misleading,” though it did not directly address the specifics of the Sagecom case.

In response, the lawyers urged the CBN not to “fall to the manipulation” of its supervisee and not to be complicit in what they described as a systemic attempt to mislead regulators and the public.


The legal team wrote: “It is our honest and sincere belief that if the judgment of the High Court which was delivered on 30/01/2018 and had therefore been in existence for seven years prior to the 31/12/2024 issuance of the Annual Report) and that of the Court of Appeal (which was delivered on 7/5/2021 and had therefore been in existence for about three and a half years prior to the 31/12/2024 date of the Annual Report) had been fully, truly, factually disclosed to your Banking Supervision Officers having the remit over your supervisee, it would have been most impossible for the said Annual Report to have been approved or authorised by the Central Bank of Nigeria for issuance and dissemination to the shareholders of your supervisee and the public at large.


“Since the final judgment, which was that of the Supreme Court, was delivered in the matter on the 11th of April 2025, no serious step has been commenced by us to even execute the judgment.”


They also offered to engage directly with the CBN prior to initiating enforcement actions, indicating a willingness to cooperate in a “reasonable manner” that acknowledges the CBN’s supervisory role.


In addition to the letter sent to the Central Bank of Nigeria, Sagecom Concept Limited’s legal representatives also informed the Managing Director/CEO of the Nigeria Deposit Insurance Corporation (NDIC) about the ongoing litigation and the substantial judgment debt against Fidelity Bank Plc.

The lawyers sent a separate letter dated May 20, 2025, copying the NDIC in the communication with the CBN. The letter, titled ‘RE: SAGECOM CONCEPT LIMITED VS FIDELITY BANK PLC & ANOR (JUDGMENTS IN SUIT NO LD/1734/2011; APPEAL NO CA/L/494/2018; SUPREME COURT NO SC/CV/602/2021),’ formally notified the deposit insurer of the significant financial liability that Fidelity Bank faces as its insured institution.


The letter stated: “As counsel for the judgment-creditor, Sagecom Concepts Limited, in the matter in the above caption, in which a quite significant judgment-sum is now outstanding against your insured institution, Fidelity Bank Plc, we have deemed it fit to put you in copy of the attached letter to the Central bank of Nigeria respecting the matter.”


Background

The dispute dates back to 2002 when FSB International Bank granted a $3 million loan to G. Cappa Plc, secured by a mortgage on a property in Ikoyi.


Fidelity Bank Plc is facing one of the biggest legal and financial crises in its history following a Supreme Court order mandating it to pay ₦225.3 billion in damages to Ibadan-based firm Sagecom Concept Limited.


The court ruling stems from a longstanding dispute over two loans originally granted by FSB International Bank to engineering company G. Cappa Plc in the early 2000s. Fidelity Bank assumed FSB’s liabilities during the 2005 banking consolidation. After a loan default, Fidelity seized collateral properties in Ikoyi and Ibadan—despite a federal court injunction—and later sold some of them to Sagecom for ₦350 million.


Sagecom later found a 2006 court disclaimer prohibiting the sale and sued to recover its funds, citing illegal asset transfers. After years of litigation, the Supreme Court ruled on April 11, 2025, in Sagecom’s favor, with Justice Adamu Jauro stating that Fidelity should not “benefit from its own wrong.” Justice Jummai Sankey labeled the bank’s actions a “deliberate disregard” for the courts.

The Lagos High Court initially awarded damages in 2011. That award was recently updated by Justice Olabisi Akinlade to reflect current economic realities: $139 million, or ₦225.3 billion using the May 15 exchange rate of ₦1,620 to $1. Fidelity is expected to contest the naira calculation at a May 19 hearing, though legal insiders say it’s unlikely to succeed.


The Lagos court awarded significant special damages in favour of Sagecom Nigeria Limited, the claimant in a protracted legal battle over a multi-unit residential property comprising several flats and two penthouses at No. 25, Probyn Road, Ikoyi, Lagos.

In its ruling, the court directed the second defendant, G. Cappa Plc, and the first defendant, Fidelity Bank Plc, to jointly and severally pay compensation to Sagecom for lost rental income.


The awarded amounts were determined based on the annual rental value of each unit, denominated in U.S. dollars or its equivalent in Naira at the prevailing Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) exchange rate at the time of payment.


The court’s assessment of damages took into account the specific rental values and the dates on which the losses were deemed to have commenced—ranging from November 2005 to December 2006 for different units. Up until June 20, 2011, liability was assigned solely to G. Cappa Plc.

However, from June 21, 2011 onward, both G. Cappa and Fidelity Bank Plc were held jointly and severally responsible. That liability remains in place until Sagecom either regains possession of the property or the original 25-year lease—granted to G. Cappa by NEPA in January 2001—expires, whichever comes first.


The annual rental values for the units ranged from $30,000 to $67,500 each. Specifically, Flat 5 was valued at $30,000 per year; Flats 2 and 8 at $33,750; Flat 9 at $56,250; Flats 1, 3, 4, and 6 at $60,000; Flats 7 and 10 at $52,500; and both penthouses at $67,500 each. These amounts are payable in U.S. dollars or their Naira equivalent, calculated at the Central Bank of Nigeria’s official exchange rate on the payment date.


The court’s ruling compensates Sagecom for the extended period during which it was denied rental income following the 2005 purchase of the property—a transaction later deemed to have breached an existing court injunction.


Damages are calculated from each unit’s respective start date until Sagecom either regains possession or the 25-year lease, which began on January 1, 2001, expires—whichever occurs first.
Additionally, the court ordered that interest on the awarded annual rental values accrues at a daily compounded rate of 19.5% per annum, starting from each annual due date until full payment is made.


Bank executives are now negotiating a structured repayment plan with Sagecom’s legal team. However, sources close to the matter say the Supreme Court’s call for urgency may limit how much the bank can spread the payments.


“This is the biggest crisis the bank has ever faced,” a senior official said, “If Fidelity survives this, it will be because Sagecom shows leniency.”


Despite reporting ₦385 billion in pre-tax profits for 2024 and seeing a 140% surge in share price this year (closing at ₦20.80 per share on Friday), most of Fidelity’s earnings are tied to rolled-over loans, raising doubts about its liquidity.

No financial institutions have stepped forward to underwrite the judgment as of Monday. Experts warn the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) may need to intervene to prevent systemic risks.

Fidelity Bank and its legal team—including Senior Advocates Kanu Agabi and Onyechi Ikpeazu—have declined public comment. Meanwhile, the CBN has remained silent.

Fidelity Bank, Nigeria’s sixth-largest by assets, is currently led by CEO Nneka Onyeali-Ikpe. The bank has faced prior criticism for aggressive loan recovery tactics, including a recent case where it was blamed for a debtor’s death.

While the outcome of the payment negotiations remains uncertain, one thing is clear: the repercussions of this judgment will reverberate through Nigeria’s financial sector for months to come.

https://saharareporters.com/2025/05/23/breaking-sagecom-petitions-cbn-accuses-fidelity-bank-lying-about-financial-status

RabbiDoracle:
Guinness released their results today and they will be paying final dividend of N7.14.

If anyone bought at N15, this will be 500% at the current price of N90.

Add that to the dividend yield on cost of 47% for this stock. Imagine getting dividend yield of 47% (approximately 43% after deducting WHT) based on the declared dividend today.

So use this Guinness story as a solace when you see low prices and buy into it.

locodemy:
I can see you are a value investor in the sense you want the company to be debt-free.
Sometimes all these companies settle some of the debts through this medium( pushing share price upwards).

I will not be surprise to see this stock trading above #1 in this very year.
A year of long term bull.

locodemy:
Well analysed but this was how those stocks that delivered 200% started.For the past 5 yrs, this stock has not produced a result like this.I think it is an improved result despite the huge debts.Their creditors may have converted the debts to equity.Who knows?
We will get clearer picture from the coming Q1 result.For me, this stock is suppose to touch 50kobo and may trade above #1 before 2022 ends.I think more good results are coming in the subsequent quarters @ Rtbriscoe.It has done almost 40% in one week.We watch

Deadlytruth:
Improved earnings

arduino:
Them fit lead you enter bush then take a shortcut to their private road oh. Shine your eyes well.

dharpzee:
Kindly note that this News is as at 2013!!

BabsO2:
https://mmsplusng.com/blog/amcon-may-take-over-dangote-refinery-as-liabilities-swell/

Hope this will not hit some bank profits with impairment charges. Which banks are exposed to Dangote Refinery debt ?

Valueinvestor:
Please what is the rationale behind the purchase of this stock. Probably there is something we don't know

awesomeJ:
Sounds like you're trying to convince people to agree with you so that you can be convinced yourself that you haven't made a mistake.

(No offence sir).


3k is superb on a 20k stock. The only issue is after collecting the dividend (13.5% yield net of WHT) It may be months, years or decades before you're able to sell and recoup your capital.

Cos I doubt if anyone would be willing to buy so much of it after markdown.

Meanwhile if this stock stays in the 20-22k range till qualification date, I'm wondering how it will be marked since 20k is the new floor.

Yayira:
Please tell me in simple English my latest status as I’m not with my glasses right now..
Am I now a shareholder or still a shellholder ?
Has my ogas at the top approved the deal ?

tiar:
Wrong! It is a share and cash acquisition. Don't mislead others.

onegentleguy:
Given the proposed merger between ACCESS and DIAMOND, it makes some sense to run an in-depth but cursory review and analysis to find out who amongst the shareholders of the 2 are up for a better deal from it all.
Put differently, where would be best for u to align with on the back of this merger?

"According to the report from both banks, the proposed merger would involve Access Bank acquiring the entire issued share capital of Diamond Bank in exchange for a combination of cash and shares in Access Bank via a Scheme of Merger.
Based on the agreement reached by the boards of the two financial institutions, Diamond Bank shareholders will receive a consideration of N3.13 per share, comprising of N1.00 per share in cash and the allotment of two(2) New Access Bank ordinary shares for every seven(7) Diamond Bank ordinary shares held as at the implementation date."

...a quick math:

On the DIAMOND side of the curve;

Today's closure price- N1.04. ...hence MoS gap from proposed merger price = 3.13-1.04 = N2.09.
Consideration price = N3.13
Cash allotment = N1
Hence allotment figure = Price consideration discounting for cash = 3.13-1 = N2.13.
Allotment ratio fulfilling implementation date- 7:2 (7 diamond for 2 access)
This means that post cash allotment, an investor's N14.91(7×2.13) worth in DIAMOND is EXPECTED to be equivalent to a N16.30(2×8.15) worth of ACCESS (assuming today's closing price of N8.15).
But DIAMOND's current price is N1.04. ...and so with reference to this allotment, an investor's N7.28(7×1.04) in DIAMOND should complement a N16.30(2×8.15) value in ACCESS.
...the interpretation of this is that an Investor/trader who managed to KEY in at the pre implementation date should at the very least be entitled to a stake of 2 units of ACCESS BANK for just N7.28. ...or per equity stake(1 unit) for only N3.64 !!
Which presents the plausibility of an already 114% ROI given ACCESS BANK'S closing price of N8.15 today.
Even if the price of DIAMOND should appreciate to the allotment figure price of N2.13, there would still be an over 9% MoS discount[(16.30-14.91)/14.91] from the current price of ACCESS. ...and we have not even factored in the N1 cash figure.
Add that up, and the chance of any possible return can only increase. (a likely 180-210% ROI).

On the ACCESS side of the curve;

We need to look at things in reverse view.
If a shareholder who keyed into DIAMOND pre implementation date can(given the above computation) get an equity stake of ACCESS BANK with just N3.64, it makes sense to assume in part(given access' current market price of N8.15) that value accretion is less here.
The best case scenerio would be to run an estimate in line with the fair value of ACCESS BANK, and do a repeat computation to see where there would likely be more 'gap' to tap from with regards to value.
At my FV estimate of N15.50 for ACCESS and using a Mix of valuation model to weigh in on the best price post merger (after dilution), ACCESS' best price would come in at slightly higher than today's closing price. (N9.40 to be precise)
Note that 'best price' in this instance refers to what I believe an equity stake of ACCESS should come to as an equivalent to DIAMOND and not necessarily the fair value of ACCESS.

Conclusion:
It makes sense to believe that the chances of reaping higher gains is more with DIAMOND than ACCESS.
...and so UNLESS THERE IS MORE TO THIS MERGER THAN WE ALREADY KNOW, the shareholders of DIAMOND has got themselves a better deal ahead of ACCESS.
So in the short term, I see a much better derivable value in DIAMOND than ACCESS. That said, there's also a high possibility of a great value with the latter in the long term, should this drive be effectively managed.

My advise:
If I were an Investor with positions in both coys, I would look to book my profit from DIAMOND within the N2-2.09 price band and no more than N9.40 in ACCESS. This should also serve to guide ur target entries if u wish to KEY in. (read between the lines from the estimates above)
...but that's just me.

NOTE: The sole aim of this run down is to look in on which among the 2 coys offers the possibility of a better baigain in terms of price appreciation.

DISCLAIMER: This analysis is purely information driven. ...and NOT a reference to any sought of recommendation !!
Due diligence should still remain ur 1st priority.

ndidigood:
Pls everyone,help me look into regal insurance,l don't do insurance since m trapped in staco since 08,but m thinking of trying to try my luck.

Dupeodus:
Aiico management continues to manipulate it's financials to suppress it's share price because of this private placement they want to do. They want to buy more shares of the company on the cheap. The q3 financials has an unexplained N3.6 billion Fair Value loss. We know that losses like this come from the valuation of their government Bond holdings when interest rate increases. However, there has not been any significant movement in government Bond coupon rates between December 2017 and end of September to justify this loss. Besides, we did not see any correspondent downward movement on the life contract liability side if interest rates has gone up This is another one on top of their undervaluation of their government Bond holdings as of 31 Dec 2017. For the financial year ending 31 Dec 2016, AIICO correctly marked down the value of it's Government bond holdings by N12 billion because interest rates on government Bond jumped. The life contract liabilities were similarly marked down. By financial year ending 31 Dec 2017 however, interest rates on government bonds reverted back to around 13%. While the life contract liabilities were correctly marked up to reflect higher valuation because of lower discounting rates, the value of the government bonds assets were not marked up to reflect the lower prevailing rates. Instead, the N12 billion negative reserve created in 31 Dec 2016 because of the asset mark down was netted against the Retained Earnings post 31 Dec 2017. If one takes out all of these manipulations through the valuation of assets and liabilities because of changes in interest rates, then you begin to see the true potential of AIICO. Sometimes, I wish I could see the financials of Leadway, the leading life insurance company to compare with AIICO but Leadway is a private company.

DeRuggedProf:
No wonder, someone wanted us to help push the price to between N70K - N1.00.
The real problem is that you may enter and get locked with this issue lingering for several moons, meanwhile, fundamentally sound stocks may have returned nearly 100% with dividend while you stay locked to get the 37.5% gain from 40k to 55k...
Even rats dig their homes with emergency exits in place.
This is not the kind of trap that catches me.
Even the management is forced to admit that they have fallen into a very big hole and are still asking to be provided with additional modern digging tools.
The only real protection for the retail investors (a listed firm) is about to be removed. After that, their voices shall be heard no more...

147 (1)This section applies where a dissenting offeree makes an election under paragraph (b)
of subsection (3) of section 146 of this Act.
(2) The offeror may, within twenty days after he had paid the money or transferred the other consideration under subsection (6) of this section apply to the court to fix the fairvalue of shares of the dissenting offeree.
(3) If an offeror fails to apply to the court under subsection (2) of this section, a dissenting offeree may apply to the court for the same purpose within a further period of twenty days.
(4) A dissenting offeree shall not be required to give securities for costs in an application made under subsection (2) or (3) of this section.
(5) Where an application is made under subsection (2) or (3) of this section-
(a) all dissenting offerees who made an election under paragraph (b) of subsection (3) of section 146 of this Act shall be joined as parties and bound by the decision of the court; and
(b) the offeror shall notify each affected dissenting offeree of the date and place of the application and of his right to appear and be heard in person or by counsel.
(6) Upon an application to the court under subsection (2) or (3) of this section, the court shall fix a fair value for the shares of all dissenting offerees who made an election under paragraph (b) of subsection (3) of section 146 of this Act.
(7) The court may, in its discretion, appoint one or more than one independent valuer to assist the court in fixing a fair value for the shares of a dissenting offeree.
( The final order of the court shall be made against the offeror in favour of each dissenting offeree who made an election under paragraph (b) of subsection (3) of section 146 of this Act and for the amount for his shares as fixed by the court.
(9) The court may, in connection with proceedings under this section, make an order, if it thinks fit and, without limiting the generality of the foregoing may :-

(a) by order, fix the amount of money or other consideration that is required to be held in trust under subsection (6) of section 146 of this Act;
(b) order that money or other consideration be held in trust by a person other than the offeree company; or
(c) allow interest at the current bank rate on the amount payable to each dissenting offeree
from the date he sends to the offeree company his share certificates under subsection (5) of section 146 of this Bill until the date of payment. (10) Where the amount of money or other consideration fixed by the court under paragraph (a) of subsection (9) of this section exceeds that held on trust pursuant to any payment or transfer already made under subsection (6) of section 146 of this Bill by the offeror, the offeror shall :-
(a) make to the offeree company any payment or transfer necessary to comply with the order, and subsection (6) of section 146 of this Act shall apply in relation to the amount so paid or transferred; or
(b) if the court made an order under paragraph (b) of subsection (9) of this section, make that payment or transfer to the other person by whom the money or consideration is to be held in trust.
(11) Where the court makes an order under paragraph (b) of subsection (9) of this section-
(a) the order of the court shall operate to divest the offeree company of the money or other consideration subject to the trust and to vest it in the person named in the order on the like trust; and
(b) Subsection (6) of section 146 of this Act shall apply to money or other consideration paid or transferred pursuant to paragraph (b) of subsection (1) of this section to that person.

Mpeace:
Wetin una dey see for this aiico sef. Uniondac is two times better. But airservices and fidelity are even better than both. My opinion sha.

deepsuk:
Happy bday to you.


Now on top d matter


To all those magas pushing first alum and Skye bank here today ...god will punish u.


Maybe u go con some young ppl here who don’t know your scam yet but v c u clear.


Bone ur useless metrics or the poo that you are serving here saying it’s calculatons while all the by doing is trying to sell a shithouse


Finally to whose who are considering buying based on these recommendations by self professed oracles and experts.....”at the end na shell holder u go b” that pop will smell from adekunle to banana

wanaj0:
A 'good' company BUT

1) Not paid dividend in years
2) Profitability dropped in its 'core business' (Company result)
3) Negative retained earnings will take 8 years to turn positive at current 'run rate'.
4) POOR margins

Candidate for take over? YES.

I can only recommend such companies for an Undertaker like Jimoh Ibrahim. Jimoh Ibrahim love such companies because they are good for asset stripping. He will help hasten their death.

wanaj0:
How do you know that people did not look at the result?

What is there to see? Attached is the latest financial statement.


http://www.nse.com.ng/Financial_NewsDocs/21594_FIRST_ALUMINIUM_NIGERIA_PLC_FINANCIAL_STATEMENTS_APRIL_2018.pdf

If you look at the 5 year Group result, did you see any consistent GROWTH in Revenue?

The company has NEGATIVE retained earning of about N1.6bn. It will take about 8 years for the retained earnings to turn positive before you can think of earning any dividend based on current run rate.

What are the ratios? Profit margin? From revenue of N10bn you make a profit of N200m! Excellent

Profit for the company dropped from N177m to N42m between 2016 and 2017! Na improvement be that? Ok ooooo.

DeRuggedProf:
FULL BID.

Yayira:
This man na real monkey hunter
Why is it always partially resurrected kobo kobo stocks you only preach about ?
Even if the company got some good thing going now, wouldn’t it be wise to wait and see if the progress continues ?

As for Yayira, she don know how una pocket deep for this blog.. she no dey follow una do stocks wey una money fit control.

DeRuggedProf:
Are you sure you are not involved in the FB?

mendes911:
Don't worry. Go and attempt the assignment. You will surely not get any answer!

Mcy56:
Chai! This is another angle of looking at it. Will do. Thank you.