The legal team of the Governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN), Mr. Olayemi Cardoso, the apex bank, and its legal director, on Monday informed the Federal High Court in Abuja of their settlement efforts following a contempt (committal to prison) suit filed against them by Melrose General Services over consultancy services.
The CBN Governor’s lawyer, Yusuf Ali SAN, disclosed the development to Justice Mohammed Umar during Monday’s proceedings.
Nairametrics recalls that the Supreme Court judgment in question concerns the reversal of the forfeiture of N1,222,384,857.84 and N220,000,000 in an appeal filed by Melrose General Services Limited against the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC).
Nairametrics previously reported that in June 2024, the Supreme Court reversed the forfeiture order issued against the company’s funds in a case initiated at the Federal High Court by the EFCC.
Company sues CBN
In case number FHC/ABJ/CS/532/2025, Chikaosolu Ojukwu (SAN) brought a contempt suit before the trial court against the CBN Governor, the CBN Director, the EFCC, and the Minister of Finance.
Ojukwu cited the Supreme Court judgment, stating: “The appellant’s application (Melrose General Services Limited) to set aside the order of interim forfeiture of the sum of N1,222,384,857.84 in the appellant’s account with Access Bank Plc and N220,000,000.00 in the accounts of the 2nd and 3rd respondents (Wasp Networks and Thebe Wellness) is hereby granted.”
He had informed the court, through his filings, that after the judgment was delivered, the EFCC, via the CBN, refunded N1,222,384,857.84 to his client in “partial compliance with the judgment.”
However, he said the CBN Governor, Legal Director, and the CBN itself have allegedly failed, refused, and neglected to pay the outstanding balance of N220,000,000.00 to his client.
He emphasized that their refusal to obey, enforce, and give effect to the judgment, as directed by the EFCC and the Ministry of Finance, amounts to contempt and undermines the authority of the Supreme Court.
Counsel for the CBN Governor, the Legal Director, and the CBN (first to third respondents), Abdulfatai Oyedele, Esq., in his Notice of Preliminary Objection and Counter-Affidavit, referred the court to a letter written to the CBN by Messrs Duale, Ovia & Alex-Adedipe on December 12, 2024.
The CBN official argued that the Supreme Court judgment never directed payment of N220,000,000 into the applicant’s account, but into the accounts of WASP NETWORK LIMITED and THEBE WELLNESS SERVICES (being the 2nd and 3rd respondents in the appeal), from where the said money was forfeited.
The court had fixed today for the substantive hearing of the matter.
What Transpired in Court
- At the court session on Monday, Ali told the judge that while the matter started with “some very big figures,” what is just outstanding is allegedly “just N20 million naira.”
- He added, “We have had preliminary discussions within ourselves; that is, the counsel to the applicant (Melrose) and ourselves.
“And we believe that this is a matter that can be settled out of court through settlement without necessarily requiring your lordship to write a ruling.”
- The senior lawyer then asked for a date to come back and make a report on the settlement.
- Ojukwu confirmed being reached out to for a settlement by the CBN’s lead counsel.
“He(Ali) has agreed to speak to the CBN on the matter,” he said.
- He confirmed parties are “settling” and entirely agreed with Ali to come back to report on the settlement.
- Ali assured the court of reporting back on “a positive note.”
- After hearing from the lawyers, the judge adjourned until July 22, 2025, for a report on the settlement.
Backstory
The EFCC had claimed that an investigation revealed N3.5 billion was allegedly fraudulently paid to the appellant (Melrose) for a purported consultancy job for the Nigerian Governors’ Forum (NGF), citing it as proceeds of an unlawful activity involving the Paris Club refund.
- At the apex court, Melrose’s legal team argued that the disputed funds were payment for a contractual and consultancy agreement between their client and relevant government stakeholders.
- In its majority decision, the Supreme Court agreed with the appellant, ruling that the EFCC failed to prove the funds were proceeds of fraud.
Consequently, the apex court upheld the appellant’s case and set aside the lower courts’ forfeiture orders.
