The Federal High Court in Lagos has dismissed a suit filed by FBN Quest Trustees Limited and a court-appointed receiver, describing the action as vexatious, frivolous, and a gross abuse of court process. In his judgment, Justice Akintayo Aluko struck out the suit and ordered the plaintiffs and their counsel to pay millions of naira in damages and legal costs.
Court Orders Senior Advocate to Pay N2 Million
The court directed senior lawyer Norrison Quakers to personally pay N2 million to the defendants for filing a frivolous action that negatively affected the reputation of the Regional Centre for International Commercial Arbitration (RCICAL). The judge also awarded N15 million as reimbursement for legal expenses incurred by the defendants and an additional N5 million against the first claimant.
Details of the Case
The suit, marked FHC/L/CS/1651/2024, was filed by FBN Quest Trustees Limited and Mr. Henry Enemodia, a court-appointed receiver and manager over several companies, including Melrose Books & Publishing Ltd, Bromley Packaging Nigeria Ltd, Bromley Technology Ltd, and Aristocrat Specialties Nigeria Limited. They sued the Regional Centre for International Commercial Arbitration and its director, Dr. McHarry Mordi, challenging the appointment of a sole arbitrator to resolve disputes arising from agreements executed between the parties.
At the heart of the dispute was the appointment of Professor Ike Ehiribe as sole arbitrator by the arbitration centre, pursuant to arbitration clauses contained in offer letters dated August 13, 2020, and November 11, 2020. The claimants argued that the arbitral proceedings ought not to continue because appeals and applications for stay of execution relating to earlier Federal High Court decisions were already pending before the Court of Appeal.
Court Ruling
Justice Aluko rejected the arguments and held that the suit was fundamentally defective. In the detailed ruling delivered on May 8, 2026, the judge ruled that the claimants had improperly initiated a fresh action while related appeals and stay applications were already pending before the appellate court. According to the court, the new suit was filed principally to frustrate compliance with earlier court orders directing the parties to proceed to arbitration.
