The Federal High Court, Abuja, has discharged First Bank of Nigeria Limited from a $8,488,752.88 garnishee proceedings dispute between NIMEX Petrochemicals Ltd and another party against Conoil Plc.
The enrolled copy of the ruling, delivered by Justice M. Umar on March 31, 2026, was obtained by Nairametrics on Wednesday and further corroborated by the bank’s legal team led by Michael J. Numa, SAN.
Nairametrics reports that a garnishee proceeding is an aspect of law whereby a judgment creditor (who has won a monetary judgment) seeks to recover the judgment debt by attaching money belonging to the judgment debtor that is held by a bank, thereby involving the bank in the case for the purpose of showing cause, if necessary.
The bank’s case was handled by M.J. Numa, SAN, Isioma Kelubia, Aifuwa Imadegbelo, and Emmanuel C. Sogo.
Nimex had sued Conoil while attaching First Bank and four other commercial banks as garnishee respondents.
What They Said
According to M.J. Numa & Partners LLP, the court upheld the submissions of Numa while reaffirming a fundamental principle of law governing garnishee proceedings.
The court, agreeing with First Bank, held that an overdraft facility constitutes a debit position and does not amount to funds standing to the credit of a judgment debtor.
Subsequently, the court held that such a facility cannot be the subject of garnishee attachment.
Quoting the ruling, the law firm stated that:
- “The court further reiterated that garnishee proceedings are strictly confined to monies in the custody of a garnishee which are in credit in favour of the judgment debtor, and do not extend to debit balances or facilities that merely reflect an indebtedness to the bank.”
- As seen by Nairametrics, the judge held that First Bank, as well as the 4th and 5th garnishees, “are hereby discharged.”
The case was subsequently adjourned to June 11, 2026, for hearing.
Reacting to the development, First Bank’s legal team stated that the ruling reinforces the legal limits of garnishee liability and provides important clarity for financial institutions operating within Nigeria.
According to the law firm, the decision represents a significant contribution to the body of law on garnishee proceedings and underscores the importance of a proper understanding of banker–customer relationships within the enforcement framework.
The law firm confirmed that the garnishee proceeding in Suit No. FHC/ABJ/CS/2428/2025 between NIMEX Petrochemicals Ltd and another against Conoil Plc arose from a substantial claim of $8,488,752.88, presenting significant legal and commercial implications for banking operations and the evolving jurisprudence on garnishee proceedings in Nigeria.
Backstory
Prior to the court’s ruling, First Bank’s lawyer had filed an affidavit to show cause why the financial institution should be discharged from the case.
In the affidavit seen by Nairametrics, a staff member of the bank deposed that, by the express terms of the various facility agreements entered into between the judgment debtor (Conoil) and First Bank, as well as settled principles of banking law, the bank is contractually and legally entitled to consolidate all accounts maintained by the judgment debtor and to exercise a right of set-off over any sums standing to the credit of the debtor towards the liquidation of its indebtedness to the bank.
- “The judgment debtor is heavily indebted to the 3rd garnishee as a result of several loan and credit facilities availed to it over the years, which were revalidated by an offer letter dated December 2, 2025, and remain outstanding, subsisting, and unpaid as at the date of service of the garnishee order nisi,” the bank staff deposed.
According to the documents, the bank’s lawyer had urged the court to hold that the monies standing to the credit of the judgment debtor do not constitute a debt owed to the judgment debtor within the banker customer relationship with the 3rd garnishee, where the debtor lacks an immediate legal right over the funds.
The lawyer further argued that, in view of the bank’s right of restriction and set-off over any sums standing to the credit of the judgment debtor, where such sums are less than the outstanding indebtedness, the credit balance cannot be subjected to garnishee proceedings.
The bank maintained that it would be in the interest of justice for the court not to make the order nisi absolute—that is, making the bank liable to pay the judgment creditor directly.
What You Should Know
Garnishee proceedings are a legal mechanism through which parties recover debts.
Banks are often joined as respondents in such proceedings.
However, the outcome depends on the decision of a court of competent jurisdiction.
