Proshare Logo
   Market Date: 20-10-2014   
Agriculture All One Min News Archives Bonds Cap Mkt Sentiments Capital Market CASHLESS NIGERIA Commodities Corporate Earnings Daily & Weekly Market Updates Enterpreneurship ETFs Forex Frauds & Scandals General Global Market Insurance Investors NewsBeat Islamic Finance Mergers & Aquisitions Money Market Mortgage Mutual Funds Nigeria Economy Oil Sector Opinions and Analysis Pensions People Personal Finance Politics Power Products & Services Professionals Property Public Offers Private Placements Regulators REITs Stock PICKS Taxation Telcos Travel & Tours Unlisted OTC MARKET World of Business

Court to rule on Access Bank, AP suit August 4

Category: General


  Read (1445)
Court to rule on Access Bank, AP suit August 4

 

 

 

The Federal High Court in Lagos has fixed ruling in the suit filed by Access Bank Plc seeking to wind up African Petroleum (AP) over non payment of $35.351 million credit facility extended to it by the bank for August 4, 2009. The debt is the outstanding obligation on the letter of credit opened in favour of AP on July 18, 2008 to facilitate the importation of petroleum products.



Justice Ibrahim Auta, who presided over the suit, fixed the date after taking the submissions from both parties on the application filed by AP challenging the jurisdiction of the court to entertain the case.

 

 


At the resumed hearing on the proceedings on Monday, AP’s counsel, P.A Ajibade claimed that the petition before the court was not within the jurisdiction of the Federal High Court, since, according to him, it has to do with the indebtedness by AP to the bank.

 

 


He claimed that the matter was not that of winding up but that of debt in dispute especially with existing claim to the tune of over N4.8 billion against the petitioner, which it accepted to underwrite for AP to pay but that the respondent refused to pay the amount claimed by the petitioner.

 

 


Olisa Agbakoba, in his argument submitted that the respondent has only put up a procedural defence to the petition, urging the court to hear the petition first, while procedural problems could be solved later.

 

 


According to him, the point was not that of jurisdiction but of procedure, as the respondent’s admission of debt was so clear.

 

 


“The only quibble in the matter”, he said, “was how much exactly to pay and therefore it is not in dispute. A dispute means that I don’t owe at all”.
Justice Auta subsequently fixed ruling on the matter till August 4, 2009 after taking the arguments of the two parties.

 

 

 

 

(Source:BusinessDay)



Tags: , 



Comment With Your Facebook or Yahoo! ID


Latest news


News on General

About Us

Who We Are
Our Team & Partners
Corporate Governance
Advertise with Us
Subscribe / Unsubscribe
Site Map
News Feed - RSS
Newsletter
Contact Us
Volunteer Program
Message from CEO
Resources

News & Features
The Analyst / Market Data
Investor Relations Portal
The Regulator
Economy & Politics
WebTV
Training Portal
Events Calendar
NewsStands - Online Reputation

Products and Services

Research & Market Intelligence
Analyst Services
Offers & Rights Support Service
Investor Relations Services
Alert & Subscription Services
Share Support Services
Proshare Consult
Event & Seminar Coverage
Market Directory
File a Complaint
News & Analysis

#1minNews
News from TheANALYST
Video News from WebTV
Money Market Updates
Opinions & Analysis
Nigerian Economy
Market Data
The Regulator
Newsletters
Discussion Forum
Policy

Subscriber Agreement
Privacy Policy
Data Policy
Disclaimer
Copyright Policy
Trademarks
Comments in Site
Advertising Code
Conflict of Interest
Content Partnership
3rd Parties

Online Trading and Execution
Training
Legal Support Services
Web/Technology Services
File a Complaint