The Supreme Court of Nigeria has upheld the decisions of the High Court and the Court of Appeal in a long-standing legal battle between Fidelity Bank Plc and Ibadan-based firm, Sagecom Concepts Limited.
Delivering its final verdict on April 11, 2025, a five-member panel of the apex court ruled unanimously in favour of Sagecom, affirming that Fidelity Bank is liable to pay at least $138,842,249 in damages. The ruling marks the conclusion of a case that began in 2005 and escalated to the Supreme Court in 2018.
However, the actual sum payable may exceed the stated amount, as the awarded damages are to be computed with a 19.5% annual compound interest rate, from their respective due dates until final payment.
The court condemned Fidelity Bank’s actions, accusing it of attempting to “benefit from its own wrong by disobeying a valid court order.”
In the lead judgment, Justice Adamu Jauro held that Fidelity Bank, having sold the disputed property to Sagecom, had the responsibility of delivering possession to the company.
He stated: “It is also in evidence that even after the delivery of the judgement of the Federal High Court in suit No. FHC/L/CS/957/2005, the second Respondent (G. Cappa Plc) continued to be in possession and control of the property, hence the judgements of the two lower courts granting the claim for special damages in favour of the first Respondent against the Appellant and second Respondent jointly and severally from 21st June, 2011, are in order.
“In my view, apart from the mountain of evidence against it, allowing the Appellant to escape liability as it so desperately seeks to do here would be tantamount to allowing it to benefit from its own wrong. The notorious principle of equity that a court ought not to allow a person to take advantage of his own wrong still remains part of our jurisprudence.”
Concurring with the ruling, Justice Jummai Hannatu Sankey emphasised the bank’s liability, noting that Fidelity’s wrongful actions were the root cause of Sagecom’s financial losses.
She said: “The trial court and the court below recognised adequately that the Appellant’s wrongful sale directly caused the first Respondent’s financial losses, thus making the Appellant liable in damages regardless of who physically collected the rents.
“This was not an unjust enrichment case, but of compensating an injured party for losses directly flowing from the Appellant’s misconduct. The fact that the 2nd Respondent may have improperly retained possession does not absolve the Appellant of its independent liability for putting the 1st Respondent in this position in the first place.
“What makes this appeal particularly unmeritorious is that the Appellant seeks to benefit from its own clear wrongdoing. Having been found in contempt for violating the Court Order, and having admitted selling the property while aware of the injunction, in addition to having deprived the first Respondent of possession for years, the Appellant now asks this Court to excuse it from the financial consequences of its actions.
“Our legal system does not countenance such an outcome. The maxim ex turpi causa non oritur actio, translates as no one should profit from their own wrongdoing.”
The case centres on a property located at 25, Probyn Road, Ikoyi, which includes ten flats and two penthouses. The property was originally leased by G. Cappa Plc from the National Electric Power Authority (NEPA) under a 25-year agreement starting January 1, 2001.
G. Cappa later used the property as collateral for a $3 million loan from Fidelity Bank. According to court documents, G. Cappa defaulted on loan repayments, prompting Fidelity Bank to sell one of G. Cappa’s properties in Ibadan and the contested property in Ikoyi. In response, G. Cappa filed suit No. FHC/L/CS/957/2005 at the Federal High Court, Lagos, which granted an interim injunction on September 9, 2005, restraining Fidelity Bank from taking further action on the Ikoyi property.
Despite this, Fidelity Bank appointed Hemaco Commercial Enterprises to sell the property. A purchase price of N350 million was agreed for the remaining lease term, and Sagecom completed the purchase in November 2005 through financing from First City Monument Bank (FCMB).
Sagecom was later joined as a defendant in the suit and filed a counterclaim against both Fidelity Bank and G. Cappa for possession and special damages. On June 20, 2011, the Federal High Court ruled that Fidelity Bank’s power of sale had arisen and upheld the legitimacy of the property transfer. However, it declined jurisdiction over Sagecom’s counterclaim and referred it to the Lagos State High Court.
Sagecom then initiated fresh proceedings at the Lagos High Court, leading to a judgement in its favour, which was upheld by the Court of Appeal and now affirmed by the Supreme Court.
Despite the ruling, Fidelity Bank, in a statement, insisted that the amount payable is significantly lower. The bank claimed the actual obligation stands at around N14 billion, citing 2005 exchange rates.
“Unfortunately, there are significant ambiguities in the judgement resulting in difficulties in calculating the actual financial liability to the G.Cappa and the Bank which is about N14 billion from our computation based on the exchange rate as of 2005 when the incident and cause of action arose,” the bank said.
“Consequently, the Bank has applied to the court for a clarification and inquiry into the proper interpretation of the judgment and the computation of the actual quantum properly and lawfully payable by G.Cappa and the Bank.”
Amid public concern over the potential financial implications, the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) has moved to reassure the public of the banking sector’s health.
In a statement signed by its Acting Director of Corporate Communications, Mrs. Hakama Sidi Ali, the CBN stated:
“The attention of the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) has been drawn to certain publications and social media reports containing misleading information regarding the operations of a regulated financial institution. The CBN wishes to categorically reassure the public, depositors, and stakeholders that the Nigerian banking sector remains resilient, safe, and sound.
“Like all other regulated institutions, the institution referenced in these reports is held to stringent regulatory requirements, and there is no cause for concern regarding the safety of depositors’ funds.
“The Bank affirms that it continues to monitor all financial institutions under its regulatory purview and maintains robust frameworks for early warning signals and risk-based supervision. These mechanisms ensure that any emerging issues are promptly addressed to protect the integrity of the financial system. We urge the public to disregard sensational or unverified claims and rely solely on official channels for information about the financial system.
“The CBN remains dedicated to fostering a secure banking environment where depositors can be fully confident in the safety of their funds. It will continue to monitor and adapt strategies to safeguard the financial interests of all Nigerians and stakeholders in our financial system.”
