S’Court Urged to Review Judgement on $64m Export Contract Dispute

Alex Enumah in Abuja

The Supreme Court has been called upon to revisit its own judgement in an alleged breach of an international commercial contract for the export of solid minerals such as Tin, Columbite and Tantalite ores, valued at $64,107,180.00.
The call was made by the Empowerment for Unemployed Youth Initiative, Independent Public Service Accountability Watch and Coalition of Civil Society Groups.

Convener of the group, Ambassador Stephen Eriba, who spoke with journalists regarding the matter, pointed out that the judgement if not reviewed would impact negatively on the business community both within and outside the country.

Recall that the apex court had in a judgement delivered on May 24, last year, affirmed the judgement of the Court of Appeal in favour of the appellant.
The appellant Owigs and Obigs had in 2016 dragged a new generation bank to a High Court of the Federal Capital Territory, over alleged cancellation of the solid mineral contract Nos: JY00NL-001/KTTA 140415, which the firm blamed on the failure/neglect of the bank to confirm the letters of credit issued by the buyer’s bank Industrial and Commercial Bank of China (ICBC).

Among the reliefs sought include an order, directing the payment of $38 million “being the loss of profit on three foreign contracts which were lost due to the defendant’s unilateral termination of the contract secured by the plaintiff.”

Plaintiff also sought for the sum of N2 billion as damages for the loss of goodwill and further trading opportunities before the Chinese Chambers of Commerce/International Chambers of Commerce of Asia and local supplies of solid minerals as well as sundry/collateral expenses incurred as a result of the unilateral termination of the contract by the defendant.

Plaintiff in addition sought for the payment of N1 billion as aggravated damages.
Delivering judgement on July 5, 2018, the FCT High Court held that the bank was not negligent and therefore not liable in damages to Owigs and Obigs and subsequently dismissed the suit.
Not satisfied, the firm appealed the judgement, upon which the appellate court in its verdict in 2020, found the bank guilty of negligence and ordered the refund of the penalty fees of $4,486 paid on behalf of the appellant.
Still dissatisfied, the firm approached the apex court to challenge the refusal of the appellate court to award damages against the respondent.

However, the apex court in its judgement last May held that, “I have no reason to disturb the decision of the lower court on the issue of damages, it therefore follows that there is no merit in the appellant’s appeal, it therefore deserves to be dismissed and it is hereby dismissed.”
According to Justice Tijjani Abubakar, who delivered the lead judgement, the appellant failed to establish his claim of loss of profit, as a result of the termination of the contract by the respondent.

“In a claim for anticipated profit, the onus is on the plaintiff to establish by evidence the anticipated profit, and that the projection in a feasibility study is not proof of such anticipated profit.

“Assuming exhibits PW1P qualifies as feasibility report, it is not by itself evidence of loss of anticipated profit incurred by the appellant,” the apex court held.

In two separate letters dated December 10, 2024 and January 9, 2025, the Managing Director of the firm, Mr. Emeka Okorie, appealed to the Chief Justice of Nigeria, to review and correct its judgement on the matter claiming that the judgement was against the evidence of the case.

Also speaking with journalists, Eriba, stated that the apex court verdict “is not in the interest of the nation, adding that it presents Nigeria and its banks as “unsafe, unhealthy and risky for business of any kind.”