The Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) and the Nigeria Deposit Insurance Corporation (NDIC) have challenged the jurisdiction of the Federal High Court, Abuja, to hear a suit filed by Aso Savings & Loans Plc and Union Homes Savings & Loans Plc over the revocation of their operating licences.
Counsel to the CBN, Onyeka Ezeah, and NDIC’s lawyer, Abubakar Shehu, raised the objection on Monday before Justice Emeka Nwite when the matter came up for the defendants to show cause.
Justice Nwite had, on December 29, declined to grant an ex parte application by the plaintiffs seeking to restrain the CBN and NDIC from taking further steps following the licence revocation. Instead, the court directed the defendants to be put on notice to show cause why the reliefs should not be granted and adjourned the matter to January 5.
ALSO READ Licence revocation: Court upholds CBN action on Aso Savings, Union Homes
At Monday’s hearing, plaintiffs’ counsel, Joseph Silas, informed the court that the CBN had served them with an affidavit to show cause, a notice of preliminary objection and a counter-affidavit. At the same time, the NDIC had also filed a counter-affidavit and a preliminary objection.
Silas argued that the hearing was strictly for the defendants to show cause, contending that the NDIC had failed to do so. He urged the court to order parties to maintain the status quo, warning that liquidation by the NDIC would irreversibly prejudice the plaintiffs if the court later found the CBN’s action unlawful.
Ezeah opposed the application, insisting that the issue of jurisdiction must be resolved first. Describing jurisdiction as “the lifeblood of a case,” she cited a 2022 Supreme Court decision in Waziri v. PDP, which held that jurisdictional issues must be determined before any other application.
Shehu aligned with the CBN’s position, stating that the NDIC was acting within its statutory mandate following the revocation of the licences and urged the court to adjourn to allow the plaintiffs respond to the preliminary objections.
Silas countered that while the suit was pending, the NDIC was proceeding with liquidation, despite the law granting the plaintiffs a 30-day window to challenge the CBN’s decision. He argued that restraining the defendants was also in the interest of depositors, noting that NDIC insurance covers a maximum of N2 million per depositor.
Responding, Shehu said the NDIC’s intervention became necessary because depositors could no longer access their funds, adding that shareholders could pursue damages if they eventually succeeded in court.
Justice Nwite questioned the propriety of granting any interim order while jurisdiction was being challenged, describing jurisdiction as a threshold issue. He adjourned the matter to January 21 for the hearing of the defendants’ preliminary objections.
Aso Savings, Union Homes, Ridhwan Hamza and Ismaila Adamu are listed as the 1st to 4th plaintiffs in the suit marked FHC/ABJ/CS/2776/2025, with the CBN and NDIC named as defendants.
The plaintiffs are seeking orders restraining the regulators from enforcing the licence revocation, arguing that the CBN failed to comply with statutory requirements under the Banks and Other Financial Institutions Act (BOFIA) 2020, and that the NDIC moved prematurely to commence liquidation.
The CBN had, on December 16, announced the revocation of the operating licences of Aso Savings and Loans Plc and Union Homes Savings and Loans Plc.
