ABUJA (Sundiata Post) – Stallion Nigeria Limited has refuted and declared as entirely false, UBA’s claim that the Stallion Group is indebted to it to the tune of N156 Billion.
The company stated on Monday, December 12, 2023, that, “There is no indebtedness of any sort by the Stallion Group to UBA as the only entity within the Stallion Group that had financing contract with UBA is Stallion Nigeria Limited.
“No other entity of the Stallion has ever obtained any facility from UBA. Second, Stallion Nigeria Limited does not owe UBA the alleged sum of N156 Billion the company said in a statement on Tuesday, 12 December 2023 issued by Alhajj Tajudeen Olalere. Executive Director.”
According to the company, “Stallion Nigeria Limited was assured of account reconciliation exercise by UBA before the Bank surreptitiously approached the Federal High Court to obtain interim orders of injunction by ex parte application on a false claim of receivership against Stallion Nigeria Limited and some of its sister companies operating in Nigeria but not against Stallion Group as falsely reported in the media.
“Stallion Nigeria Limited and its affected sister companies named as co-defendants in the suit are vehemently opposing the action of UBA in the Federal High Court.
“Most of the companies within the Stallion Group are not in any way affected by the action filed by UBA and neither their assets nor their operations are affected by the lawsuit of UBA. As a matter of Nigerian law, a court of law does not assume jurisdiction over any party that is not expressly named as a defendant in an action before it.
“Stallion Nigeria Limited has exercised its right of appeal against the decision of the Federal High Court refusing to set aside the ex-parte orders granted in favour of UBA Plc.
“In a Notice of Appeal made available to the press, the Company stated that the Judge erred on ten grounds which include the incompetence of the suit which robbed the court of the Jurisdiction to entertain the Suit. Stallion stated that the Court refused to consider several facts misrepresented and materials concealed by UBA in its ex parte application to the court for the interim Order.
“Stallion maintained that upon a proper reconciliation of account, the allegation of indebtedness by UBA is unfounded, as it has, over the period of relationship with the Bank, made several deposits on account, which payments were made despite that it was yet to receive proceeds of the part-financed contract supply to the Federal Government.
“The company maintained that it was already in discussion and had a firm commitment from the management of UBA to reconcile the account before the Bank surreptitiously proceeded to Court in bad faith.
“The company also denied the allegation of dissipating it’s assets, as the assets are immoveable and with a combined value together with receivables over and above the alleged indebtedness, a fact the court inexplicably downplayed.
“Stallion stated that it is already documenting its losses arising from UBA’s invasion of its business premises and pursue will reserve the right to pursue and enforce the indemnity for damages, arising from the disruption of it’s operations, as was similarly upheld and damages of 72 Billion naira (Seventy-two billion naira) awarded by another judge of the same Federal High Court against Ecobank in favour of Honeywell for similar and unjustified disruption of business.”
