News

Court Orders UBA To Pay ₦30m For Unlawfully Freezing Customer’s Account

Court Orders UBA To Pay ₦30m For Unlawfully Freezing Customer’s Account
  • PublishedAugust 13, 2025

The Federal High Court in Abuja has ordered United Bank for Africa (UBA) to pay ₦30 million in damages to Micoz Bluelink Enterprise for unlawfully restricting its domiciliary account for over a year and withdrawing $163,592 without authorisation.

Justice Peter Lifu, who delivered the judgment, also directed the immediate reversal of the withdrawn funds, ruling that the bank had no legal basis for freezing the account or transferring funds without a court order or notifying the customer.

The judge described the act as “a breach of the banker-customer’s relationship” and said UBA’s action was “ultra vires its powers, reckless and bereft of mercy.”

“The bank failed to inform the applicant of reasons for the restriction and proceeded with unilateral withdrawal, thereby breaching the banker-customer contract,” he held.

On the validity of the bank’s evidence, Lifu found UBA’s Exhibit ‘A’ defective, stating, “There is no mention of ‘fraud’ or ‘fraudulent’ in the document, which only states ‘Possible Duplicate’ and does not justify a call back.”

He stressed that “customer’s funds could only be withdrawn from their account pursuant to an unequivocal instruction by the customer or a court order”, adding that “neither of which was presented.”

The judge declared UBA’s actions “illegal, unconstitutional and a breach of banker-customer relationship,” and said the award of ₦30 million in damages factored in “the continual depreciation of the naira.”

UBA, through its counsel, Kalat Jatau, had admitted the inflow of $163.8 million but argued that the funds were flagged as suspicious and that a suspicious transaction report was filed with the Nigerian Financial Intelligence Unit.

The bank maintained that it restricted the account pending enhanced due diligence and that the funds were recalled following a SWIFT instruction from its correspondent bank, Citi Bank.

The plaintiff’s lawyer, Chikaosolu Ojukwu, told the court, “The applicant made several enquiries to the bank seeking reasons for the account restriction, but the bank failed to respond or unfreeze the account.”

His co-counsel, Adeyemo Richard, also argued that “there is no mention of fraud in the call-back request presented by the bank, and the document lacks proper endorsement and authenticity.”

Lifu concluded that UBA breached its fiduciary duty and awarded post-judgment interest of 10 per cent until the judgment sum is fully liquidated.