A consortium of civil society organizations have appealed to the Supreme Court to review its judgment in a multi-million dollars contractual dispute between an indigenous company, Owigs and Obigs Nig. Ltd and the Zenith Bank Plc.

The groups anchored by the Empowerment for Unemployed Youths Initiative, Independent Public Service Accountability Watch, among others, made the call Tuesday in Abuja at a press conference.

The convener of the groups, Stephen Ebira, while speaking on the matter faulted the judgment of the apex court, insisting it was punctuated by decisions and misrepresentation of facts, contrary to the evidence adduced before the trial court.
He noted that the said judgment sought to be reviewed which was in favour of Zenith bank, amounted to a miscarriage of justice as the wrongdoer was declared innocent and rewarded, while the victim of the said contract gone awry was held liable and punished.

While restating that the Supreme Court should be a place for the restoration of hope for the ordinary and aggrieved persons and not where truth is strangulated, as was the case in the judgment under reference, the groups insisted that the judgment cast a terrible slur on the presumed integrity of the apex court.

They also said it has dealt a lethal blow on the integrity of the nation’s banking sector when playing any role in international businesses.
“The judgment in appeals no: SC.709/2020 delivered on May 24, 2024, is a broad-day robbery of justice.

“The Supreme Court should be a place where justice is birthed, not assassinated and buried.
“It raised a red flag for investors and tarnished the surviving fragment of the nation’s reputation before the international communities, and should be quickly reviewed,” the statement emphasised.
Our correspondents gathered from the court processes that the law suit bother on a breach of an international commercial contract for the export of solid minerals on a 100% credit basis, with letter of credit confirmation by the confirming bank (Zenith Bank) as required by the fundamental credit term of the contract.

The main contract, according to the claimant’s, Owing and Obigs Nig Ltd, in the contract marked: JYOONL-OO1/ KTTA 140415, is a quadrilateral agreement between the buyer, seller, LC issuing bank, and LC confirming bank, comprising four interdependent and interrelated autonomous contracts.

Sadly, it noted, the confirming bank (Zenith bank Plc) was alleged to have maliciously breached the critical fundamental credit term without any reason whatsoever, thereby, activating the contract’s default clause, triggering off specific damages without remedy amounting to millions of dollars.

The appellant argued that the judgment of the apex court curiously created a fake irrevocable documentary letter of credit with SWIFT MT 700, without a confirming bank, contradicting the original document and making a mockery of international trade standard and practices.
“This false irrevocable documentary letter of credit with SWIFT MT 700 is issued for contract agents and facilitators instead of the buyer-seller contract,” the NGOs states.

They also alleged that the judgment altered parties in the case by the misconceived irrevocable documentary letter of credit which listed only three parties, excluding the confirming bank/respondent, instead of the four parties as contained in the processes filed in the court.

They claimed that “in the judgment, the Supreme Court re-wrote an international contract for the parties in favour of the breaching party by subsisting a non-party with the actual party, and removed the liabilities of the legitimate party to a non-party contrary to the evidence on record and protocol upheld by Uniform Trade Customs and Practice which ruled and governed the contract.- A treaty to which Nigeria is a signatory.

The seller’s bank (Zenith bank PLC) was declared the issuing bank instead of confirming bank, contrary to the evidence on record and serial admissions by the bank, in order to absolve the confirming bank as the breaching party from it’s default liabilities, they stated.

The appellant’s claimed that “it’s fundamental right to generate/earn revenue and profits through legitimate business transactions as established by the laws of the Federal Republic of Nigeria was maliciously breached due to the malicious violation of contract No JYOONL-OO1/KTTA 140415”.

The appellant explained that “it’s decision to approach the apex court was not to seek special damages or rights, as misconstrued by the court, but rather it was to enforce the specific remedies outlined in the contract’s default and liability clause; which specifically warned against breach of contract and consequences including the appellant’s right to generate revenue, which the breaching bank violated under the sales contract.

“The case of the appellant is that after securing an export licence to export solid minerals sometimes in 2014, Zenith bank Plc agreed to offer export finance facility if it could secure an export trade contract backed by an acceptable letter of credit from foreign entity/company.

“Following discussions with the bank, the appellant engaged the services of an international agent, Eglone Group Asia Pte Limited based in Singapore, to help it broker/secure foreign buyers for tin Ore, tantalite ore and columbite ore.

“Eglone Group Asia Pte Limited eventually succeeded in getting two buyers for the appellant (Owigs and Obigs Nig. Ltd) in March and April 2014.

“The first contract that was secured is contract No. Jy-OONL-001, dated March 5, 2014, which was executed between the appellant and Guangdong Jiayuan Metals Co. Ltd of China for the supply of Tin ore; while the second contract with contract No. KTTA 140145, dated April 15, 2014, was executed between the appellant and King-Tan Tantalum Industry Ltd of China for the supply of Columbite ore and tantalite ore.

“However, due to the failure of the appellant (Owigs and Obigs Nig.Ltd) to execute the contract on time, the contracts were cancelled, and penalty fees were deducted by Zenith bank from the appellant’s account”.

According to the appellant, “the cancellation of the contracts was because Zenith bank failed/neglected to confirm letters of credit issued by the buyer’s bank, the Industrial and Commerce Bank of China (ICBC).

“It was based on this that the appellant commenced legal actions against the bank, claiming monetary damages for the negligence”.