E-Financial
Firms Slam N7Bn Suit on FCMB over Alleged Breach of Contract

Sunlek Investment Limited and Sunsteel Industries Limited, two limited liability companies, have slammed a N7billion suit on First City Monument Bank (FCMB) Plc over alleged breach of contract.

In a 126 -paragraph of statement of claim accompanied by 27 paragraphs of a witness’ sworn oath and filed before a Federal high court sitting in Lagos south west Nigeria by Mr. John Olusegun Odubela SAN, Lagos lawyer, the two companies alleged that they operated loan accounts with First City Monument Bank. It was from there disbursement was made for all letters of credit /loan facility granted to them by the bank for the importation of raw materials.
However since 23rd May, 2013 when the bank entered into an agreement to grant them loan, and open a loan facility account for them till date, they have not been given the particulars of the loan facility account neither has any statement of account of this loan account been made available to them.
The companies alleged further that by a commitment letter dated 23rd May,2013 and the term sheet for facility duly signed /executed by the two parties, FCMB committed and undertook to fund on fully-underwriten basis the debt finance (importation of goods) of $1.5 million and N422.5 million.
Thereafter other loans facilities were granted to the companies by the bank.
The total amount of the letters of credit opened by the bank in favour of the companies is $8 million out of which sum the companies contributed 10% based on the terms of the grant of the various offers for facility utilized to open letters of credit from 22nd, March 2013 to September, 2017. The loans facilities were well secured.
The companies contended that from the available records available to them,it was reflected that they have fully repaid their indebtedness to the Bank
However the companies were bewildered when they received the bank’s letter that their indebtedness to the bank as at 14th of March,2019 was in the sum of N1.1 billion that the debt should be liquidated within 14 days, despite the fact that they had fully repaid the loan they took from the bank.
Consequently, they engaged the services of an accounting firm to audit their account, the plaintiff by their letter and their solicitor’s letter requested for statements of accounts of the loan accounts from the bank, but the bank deliberately failed to make available the said statement of account.
However from the forensic analysis of their accounts, the plaintiffs contended that they are not in any way indebted to the bank.
From the forensic audit report it was discovered that there were two transactions carried out on letter of credit, wherein substantial volume of the product were damaged. The value of items purchased by the letters of credit was in the sum of $2million for the importation of cold rolled steel strips, galvanized steel strips and Zinc wire from Chemetals (HK) limited Unit 1105H/F Lippo Center 89,Queens Way Hong Kong.
FCMB is solely and unilaterally liable to undertake all the risk Insurance policy Clause A for the consignment/raw material to be imported by virtue of the letter of credit.
The bank solely negotiated insurance policy obtained for the products purchased and appointed Mansard Insurance Plc to provide insurance cover Clause C for the importation of the consignment.
Upon taking delivery of the consignment after payment of custom duties and port charges, it was discovered that large volumes of the said consignments were in various forms of damaged conditions.
The companies informed the bank about the damaged consignment and the need to pursue insurance claim for the damage, the bank requested for documents which were presented to them to pursue the claim.
However, the agent of the bank sent a report to the companies to inform them that from the nature of damages to some of the products, the insurance policy, being a Clause C policy as undertaken by the bank is not sufficient to cover the nature of loss from the said damages to the products.
The total value of the consignment damaged is in the sum of $628,386.23 and N336.1 million.
The bank ought to have undertaken an all risk insurance policy cover with the insurance company. As a result of the damages to the consignment, they were not fit for use and could not be refined in the plaintiffs machine and remained in the factory as junk or waste material.
The companies averred that they had suffered financial loss as a result of the breach of contract in the sum of N884.9 million which has negatively affected their business operation since 2014 till date.
They averred that they are entitled to claim damages for breach of contract against the bank that had by its various acts of breaches of the various letters of offer for facility caused great loss to their business.
Consequently the companies’ claim against FCMB jointly and severally are as follows :
General damages in the sum of N5billion.
A declaration that the plaintiffs are not indebted to the bank in any sum premised on the fact that they had settled all their indebtedness on the facilities granted to them by the bank.
A declaration that the bank breached the terms of letter of credit and is liable for the loss of the letters of offer on importation, in the sum of $2million.
A declaration that the bank is liable to refund to the plaintiffs N884.9 million,being the losses uncured on the damaged consignment purchased through letters of credits,and failure and refusal of the bank to obtain an all risk insurance policy for the shipment of the said consignment.
An order for the payment of N826.9 million being the total sum wrongly debited on the companies’ account by the bank.
An order of the court restraining FCMB from appointing and or registering any instrument of appointment of an official receiver or any instrument whatsoever made for the purpose of enforcing the security for the payment of alleged indebtedness in the sum of N1.1 billion being allegedly claimed against the plaintiffs by the bank .
Cost of litigation assessed at N250million.
E-Financial
Transfers Fail as Banks Suffer USSD Glitches

Nationwide Unstructured Supplementary Service Data (USSD) glitches are occurring because the Nigerian Communications Commission (NCC) and Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) transitioned to an “End-User Billing” (EUB) framework.

USSD is a real-time messaging protocol that allows you to communicate directly with your mobile network provider’s computers. It operates without needing an internet connection and is typically triggered by dialing a code starting with \(\ast \) and ending with \(\#\) (e.g., $\ast$123\(\#\)).
Instead of deducting fees from bank accounts, the ₦6.98 per-session charge is now deducted directly from mobile airtime.
The disruptions, which have affected customers of several leading banks including First Bank of Nigeria, Access Bank, United Bank for Africa, First City Monument Bank and Stanbic IBTC Bank, have sparked confusion among retail customers, traders and Point of Sale operators who rely heavily on USSD banking for daily transactions.
Previously, banks deducted USSD charges directly from customers’ bank balances before settling telecom operators separately.
That framework has now been replaced with an End-User Billing system.
Under the new model, customers are charged N6.98 for every 120-second USSD session, with the fee deducted directly from mobile airtime.
This means customers with little or no airtime on their SIM cards may be unable to complete transfers, regardless of how much money they have in their bank accounts.
E-Financial
Court Affirms CBN’s Exclusive Ownership of eNaira Trademark

A Federal High Court in Abuja has affirmed the Central Bank of Nigeria’s (CBN) exclusive ownership of the “eNaira” digital currency platform and trademark.

eNaira
Justice James Omotosho, in a judgment delivered on Friday, restrained eNaira Payment Solutions Limited from presenting itself as the owner of the “eNaira” trademark.
The court also ordered the company to immediately adopt a new name that does not contain the word “Naira”.
The suit, marked FHC/ABJ/CS/113/2021, was dismissed, while the court awarded N10 million costs in favour of the CBN following its successful counterclaim.
Justice Omotosho held that although the company had been registered with the Corporate Affairs Commission (CAC) since 2004, its name was misleading because of its close association with Nigeria’s sovereign currency.
“The name chosen by the plaintiff on its incorporation is in the circumstances unregistrable due to the misleading nature of the name, which suggests government patronage,” the judge ruled.
The court further noted that the Trademark Registry had, through a letter dated Nov. 15, 2021, withdrawn approvals earlier granted to the company for applications related to the “eNaira” trademark under classes 36 and 42.
According to the judgment, the company was informed that “eNaira is a national intellectual property and constitutes a symbol and national asset of Nigeria.”
Justice Omotosho ruled that the plaintiff had no superior legal claim to the trademark and therefore could not seek injunctive relief against the CBN.
“A party that has no legal right cannot be entitled to an injunction. The purport of this is that, prima facie, the plaintiff has no valid trademark to the exclusive use of the eNaira trademark,” he held.
The judge also emphasised that under Section 852(2) of the Companies and Allied Matters Act, the CAC has powers to reject or direct changes to company names that suggest government affiliation.
“The ‘eNaira’ name is so closely linked to the legal tender of Nigeria, which is exclusively controlled by the CBN.
“An average person on the street is most likely to think that the plaintiff is an agent of the Federal Government or the CBN,” the court stated.
Justice Omotosho added that the company’s proposed activities involving digital currency operations created the impression that it had official authority to issue or manage a digital version of the naira.
“The proposed business of the plaintiff… no doubt creates the impression that the plaintiff has the authority of the Federal Government of Nigeria to issue and control a digital form of the Naira,” he said.
The judge warned that allowing a private entity to control the “eNaira” name could undermine public confidence and create confusion within the country’s financial system.
“Any digital currency with the name ‘eNaira’ will no doubt create the impression that it is an official digital form of the Naira.
“This would be disastrous for the Nigerian economy and will create skepticism among users, as it is not guaranteed by the Central Bank of Nigeria,” he added.
The court also observed that the CAC had lawfully directed the company to change its name within six weeks of its Dec. 9, 2021 directive, but the company failed to comply.
During proceedings, counsel to the plaintiff, Mr David Ityonyman, argued that the word “Naira” was not exclusive to Nigeria and should not be monopolised.
“Nothing stops India from having a Naira. Also, countries like the U.S. and Canada make use of dollars. None of them has laid claim to the name,” he submitted.
He further argued that the company had used the “Naira” branding internationally for more than two decades before the CBN launched the eNaira platform in 2021.
E-Financial
CBN to Simplify Bank Alerts over Rising Customer Complaints

Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) and commercial banks are reviewing the large number of transaction alerts sent to customers and the complaints about bank charges.

So called bank alert refers to real-time SMS or email notifications from your financial institution about transactions, balances, or security updates.
Olayemi Cardoso, governor, CBN, said this in Abuja after the 305th Monetary Policy Committee meeting.
He explained that many bank customers are confused because they receive too many debit alerts for a single transaction.
To address this, the CBN has created a quarterly meeting system involving its consumer protection team, commercial banks, and the top 10 microfinance banks. The goal is to resolve customer complaints faster and improve banking services.
Cardoso said one major issue being studied is how banks send multiple notifications for one transaction.African Politics Analysis
He said this often confuses customers and suggested that alerts should be simplified and combined so people can clearly understand what each debit is for.
He added that the issue is still being worked on and solutions will be proposed soon.
On the N50 stamp duty charge, the CBN governor explained that it is not a bank charge.
He said the charge comes from tax authorities, while banks only collect it and send it to the government.
He advised customers who notice wrong charges to first complain to their bank. If the issue is not resolved, they can escalate it to the CBN’s consumer protection department.
Cardoso also said the CBN has strengthened its monitoring system to ensure banks handle complaints properly, compensate customers when needed, and improve customer service.
The CBN is also reviewing how banks apply rules on charges and customer complaints, with the aim of improving transparency and reducing repeated issues in the banking system.
Telecom3 days agoNCC Drafts New Rules for Virtual Mobile Operators
Telecom3 days agoAirtel Africa Launches $110m Share Buyback Programme for Capital Efficiency
General News3 days agoWHO Says Ebola Risk Now at Highest Level
E-Business3 days agoLG Electronics Showcases Advanced HVAC Solutions at Mega Clima Nigeria 2026
Telecom3 days agoMTN Nigeria Tops Gender Equality Rankings After Major Workplace Transformation, IFC Report Reveals
News3 days agoFG Unveils AI Public Services Platform
Telecom3 days agoAustralian Court Upholds Fine Against X Over Child Safety Compliance Failures
Telecom3 days agoMicrosoft, Partners Launch ‘LINGUA Initiative’ to Save African Languages From Digital Extinction















