A Federal High Court in Lagos has awarded N20,732,299,999.21 in favour of Union Bank Plc against a petroleum marketer, Kehinde Elliot Ogbor, and his company, Danium Energy Services Limited.
Justice Deinde Dipeolu, who delivered the judg-ment in Suit FHC/L/CS/1905/2023, also directed Union Bank to take exclusive possession of all properties belonging to Ogbor and Danium Energy that were pledged as collateral for the loan.
These include properties in Ikoyi, Banana Island, and Victoria Island in Lagos, as well as the company’s head office at Anifowoshe Street, Victoria Island.
Union Bank approached the court seeking interpretation and enforcement of a Memorandum of Settlement dated March 6, 2018, and a Consent Judgment of April 25, 2018, which the bank claimed were breached by Ogbor and Danium Energy.
The bank argued that the settlement agreement, along with personal guarantees executed by the defendants, created valid contractual obligations and that the defendants’ failure to settle their debts had triggered the bank’s statutory power to foreclose on the pledged properties.
Union Bank also requested orders for police and security assistance to enforce possession if required.
The bank’s claim sought the immediate recovery of the outstanding debt, enforcement of the terms of the settlement, and authorisation for foreclosure and sale of the properties used as collateral.
The suit was filed under the Federal High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules 2019 and the bank’s inherent jurisdiction.
In response, Ogbor and Danium Energy filed a joint counter-affidavit and counterclaim, challenging the bank’s case for lacking merit.
The defendants sought dismissal of the Union Bank’s suit, claiming that the Memorandum of Settlement and Consent Judgment were vitiated by fraud, misrepresentation, undue influence, and economic duress, making the agreements voidable.
They argued that Danium Energy had fulfilled its obligations under a 2019 offer letter, including repayment through the crystallisation of a Keystone Bank guarantee and delivery of petroleum cargo to an off-taker, and requested refunds of any amounts allegedly wrongfully demanded by Union Bank.
The counterclaim also sought damages for alleged conspiracy, fraud, and injury to reputation, as well as the return of all collateral securities, including properties and the vessel MT Elohim.
After considering all submissions and reviewing the evidence, Justice Dipeolu dismissed the defendants’ counter-affidavit and counterclaim, ruling entirely in favour of Union Bank.
The court granted the bank all reliefs sought, including immediate liquidation of the outstanding debt and authorisation to take exclusive possession and sell the pledged properties.
