Federal High Court Orders 54 Banks to Refund N9.3 Billion Fraudulently Transferred to Their Accounts
In a landmark ruling, Justice Deinde Dipeolu of the Federal High Court in Lagos has mandated 54 banks to promptly return a staggering sum of N9,329,322,870 that was fraudulently siphoned from an unspecified old generation bank. The decision, issued on April 15, 2025, came in response to an ex parte application lodged under case number FHC/L/CS/629/2025.
The court has instructed the financial institutions to impose a Post No Debit restriction on all accounts that benefitted from the misappropriated funds and to swiftly initiate the return of any available funds to the originating bank. The plaintiff reported that their core banking system had experienced a breach on March 23, 2025, leading to unauthorized withdrawals from multiple customer accounts.
The misappropriated amount exceeding N9.3 billion was subsequently distributed among accounts held in 54 different banking institutions. Upon discovering the breach, the affected bank acted quickly to notify the involved banks and began tracking the trail of the stolen funds. Investigations revealed that the funds had been transferred in multiple stages from the bank to primary accounts, which were then diverted to accounts held by secondary and tertiary beneficiaries.
In his ruling, Justice Dipeolu directed the implicated banks to submit detailed reports on the affected accounts, including current balances and the amount that had been withdrawn. Furthermore, he ordered the immediate recovery of all funds that could be retrieved for the plaintiff bank.
The financial institutions are required to share comprehensive customer data regarding the involved transactions, including the names associated with the accounts and the destination of the funds. The court has mandated that restrictions on all accounts that were involved in the transaction remain in place until full recovery is achieved, limited to the amounts each account received.
Justice Dipeolu clarified that this ruling pertains solely to the funds that were fraudulently transferred and does not interfere with the other deposits held by customers. “For clarity, this order exclusively concerns the amounts that were erroneously transferred and sums that can be recovered,” he stated firmly, upholding the court’s jurisdiction to enforce complete restitution of the stolen funds, which he affirmed belong to the plaintiff and not the customers of the respondent banks.
Join our Channel...