Justice Dehinde Dipeolu of the Federal High Court, Ikoyi, Lagos, has ordered 16 officials of Stanbic IBTC Bank Plc to appear before the court over alleged disobedience of subsisting court orders in a dispute involving Guaranty Trust Bank Plc.
The directive was issued during proceedings in Suit No: FHC/L/CS/1738/2024, instituted by Guaranty Trust Bank Plc against GY Farmers Ltd and others.
At the resumed hearing on April 1, 2026, counsel to the plaintiff, A.B. Ogunba, SAN, drew the court’s attention to a motion for contempt dated March 27, 2026. He urged the court to compel the affected officials to appear and show cause why they should not be committed to prison for alleged wilful disobedience of court orders.
Ogunba informed the court that all parties had been served with the relevant contempt processes, including Forms 48 and 49.
Those cited in the application include senior officials of Stanbic IBTC Bank Plc: Yinka Sanni, Wole Adeniyi, Olubunmi Dayo-Olagunju, Olufunke Amobi, Olu Delano, Eric Fajemisin, Kola Lawal, Remy Osuagwu, Abubakar Sadiq Bello, Helmut Engelbrecht, Rabi Isma, Funeka Montjane, Simon Ridley, Remilekun Soyannwo, and Justus Ineanacho.
The dispute arose from preservative orders granted on October 25, 2024, restraining the defendants from dissipating funds amounting to N806,393,894.38, and directing financial institutions to disclose any funds held on behalf of the defendants.
The plaintiff alleged that Stanbic IBTC Bank, despite being served with the order, filed an affidavit on November 8, 2024, stating that only the 5th defendant maintained an account with the bank and that the account held no funds.
However, the plaintiff contended that the bank had earlier acknowledged placing a lien on the account on November 4, 2024, and that the account contained R8,736,661.91 at the time—facts it claimed were not disclosed to the court.
Following the alleged discrepancies, the court, on February 24, 2026, ordered the attachment of the funds.
During Wednesday’s proceedings, counsel to Stanbic IBTC Bank, J.C. Iheanacho, said the bank had filed counter-affidavits in response to the contempt processes, maintaining that no such funds existed in the account of the 5th defendant.
He argued that the correspondence relied upon by the plaintiff was a routine banking communication and did not establish the presence of funds, adding that a bank official in court could clarify the content of the letter.
Justice Dipeolu, however, noted that the contents of the correspondence were clear and did not admit of alternative interpretation.
Counsel to the 2nd defendant, Adeyinka Olumide Fusika, SAN, raised concerns about procedural fairness and urged that all processes filed by the bank be served on the defendants. He also expressed concern over what he described as a pattern of banks deposing to false affidavits.
Fusika informed the court of a pending application for stay of proceedings but said it would not be pursued at this stage to allow the contempt proceedings to continue.
In response, Iheanacho sought an adjournment to enable the bank file further counter-affidavits.
After hearing the parties, Justice Dipeolu adjourned the matter to April 20, 2026, and directed the 16 officials to appear in court to show cause why they should not be committed to prison.
The plaintiff is also seeking an order lifting the corporate veil of Stanbic IBTC Bank Plc to hold its principal officers personally liable, as well as an order committing them to a correctional facility until the alleged contempt is purged.