…as judge upholds receiver
A Federal High Court sitting in Ikoyi, Lagos State has upheld the Unted bank for Africa (UBA)’s receiver, its mortgage security and the liability of the guarantors in its.
The Court presided over by Justice Daniel Osiagor held that the defendants did not dispute owing money, but only the amount, stressing that a reconciliation of accounts did not cancel the debt.
Justice Osiagor therefore ruled on the three-year effort in favour of the UBA’s effort to recover money which it asserted Stallion Group owed it.
The Court resolved every issue in the UBA’s favour and granted all of its reliefs sought just as it confirmed Romeo Ese Michael as receiver-manager, with the right to take possession of the mortgaged property and seek protective orders.
Justice Osiagor barred the defendants from diverting payments owed to them by government agencies, thereby reinforcing the Bank’s ability to protect its recovery interests and therefore dismissed objections raised by the 12th Defendant (Barbedos Ventures Limited), and held that it had failed to establish any proprietary rights over the mortgaged property.
Accordingly, the Court held that its consent was not required for the creation of the mortgage, and its objections were rejected.
When UBA filed the suit in October 2023, it claimed N156.03 billion, as being owed which Stallion insisting that the claim was entirely false.
The case began when Justice Akintayo Aluko granted UBA orders to take over assets of Stallion Nigeria Ltd. and its affiliates in Lagos, Port Harcourt and Kano, and to freeze their funds across Nigerian banks. Stallion’s attempts to lift those orders failed in December 2023.
The defendants include Von Automobile Nigeria, Stallion Motors, The Honda Place and director Sunil Vaswani.
The ruling strengthened a principle that Nigerian lenders rely on: arguing over how much is owed does not by itself stop a creditor from enforcing its security.
UBA is using the same receiver to pursue N61.45 billion linked to Western Metal Products Co.
The judgment marked a major milestone in UBA’s efforts to recover its exposure to Stallion Group and safeguard the interests of the Bank and its stakeholders.
The Court had affirmed its jurisdiction to hear the case just as the defendants did not dispute their indebtedness, but only questioned the amount owed.
The Court also held that the guarantors were held liable just as it held that the appointment of the Receiver/Manager was valid and also affirmed the right of the Receiver/Manager’s to take possession of the mortgaged property.
The Court also held that the Receiver/Manager was entitled to seek protective orders, adding that the reconciliation exercise did not negate the indebtedness.
The Court also dismissed the objection of the 12th Defendant saying that it failed to establish any proprietary rights over the mortgaged property, and held that its consent was not required for the mortgage.
The Court specifically restrained the defendants from diverting receivables due to them from government agencies.
