Justice Ayokunle Faji of the Federal High Court, Ikoyi, Lagos, has delivered a landmark judgment against Access Bank Plc, awarding N10 million in damages to Adenike Akinlade for the unlawful freezing of her account without a valid court order.
The court described the bank’s actions as unconstitutional, illegal, and a violation of the applicant's fundamental rights.
In the suit marked FHC/L/CS/2461/2023, Justice Faji declared that the placement of a Post No Debit (PND) order on Akinlade's account was a breach of her right to access her funds, guaranteed under Section 44 of the Nigerian Constitution and Article 14 of the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights.
Illegal Freezing of accounts violates Fundamental Rights
The court found that Access Bank placed the PND on Akinlade’s account, citing an expired court order obtained through Interpol.
Justice Faji emphasized that the bank acted unlawfully by continuing the restriction beyond August 4, 2022, when the order ceased to have legal effect.
Furthermore, the bank failed to provide any evidence of subsequent communication from Interpol or legal justification for maintaining the freeze.
Justice Faji also ruled that Access Bank violated Akinlade's rights by refusing her access to her funds even after the account was no longer under investigation.
The court condemned the lack of communication or explanation for this denial.
Reliefs Granted by the Court
The court granted several declarations and orders in favour of Akinlade, including:
1. Declaring the PND order illegal, unconstitutional, and void.
2. Affirming that Access Bank cannot act on third-party instructions, including from law enforcement, to restrict accounts without a valid court order.
3. Ordering the immediate release of the restriction on Akinlade’s account.
4. Awarding N10 million in general damages for the loss of business integrity, financial deprivation, and emotional distress caused by the restriction.
Bank’s Defence Rejected
Access Bank, through its lawyers, argued that the applicant’s rights to her account were not absolute and could be restricted under deserving circumstances.
However, Justice Faji rejected this argument, noting that the bank failed to justify the prolonged restriction or produce evidence of compliance with the law.
The court further criticized the bank's lack of diligence, stating, “The respondent held on to the applicant’s account and denied her access to same in breach of her rights. The restriction was without justification and is not allowed under the law.”
Copyright Notice: All rights reserved. The content on this website, including text and other digital materials, may not be reproduced, published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed, in whole or in part, without the express written consent of THE NEWS ACCELERATOR NETWORK.
For advertising inquiries, news coverage, or press releases, please contact us at thenewsacceleratornetwork@gmail.com or call 08144048512, 08051017159.
Post a Comment