Federal High Court in Lagos reaffirms order restraining further criminal action against Sterling Bank and its executives pending determination of a substantive suit
The Federal High Court sitting in Lagos has reaffirmed its earlier order restraining parties from taking further steps regarding criminal allegations made against Sterling Bank Limited and some of its senior executives, pending the determination of a substantive suit before the court.
Also read: Sterling Bank champions food security for a better Africa
Justice Daniel Osiagor restated the directive on Wednesday when the matter, marked Suit No. FHC/L/CS/158/2025, came up for hearing.
The case lists Sterling Bank Limited and five others as plaintiffs, while the defendants include the House of Representatives (Nigeria) and four other parties.
During the proceedings, senior advocate Femi Falana (SAN), alongside Funmi Falana (SAN) and Taiwo E. Olawanle, appeared for the plaintiffs.
L. M. Alozie (SAN) represented the fourth defendant, while Sylvester Azubuike appeared for the fifth defendant. Other defendants were also represented by their respective counsel.
Reiterating the earlier directive, Justice Osiagor stated that no further steps should be taken in relation to the criminal allegations against the bank and its officials until the substantive issues before the court are determined.
The judge subsequently adjourned the matter until May 11, 2026 for further proceedings.
The suit was instituted by Sterling Bank Limited, Sterling Financial Holdings Company, and some of the bank’s executives.
The plaintiffs are challenging the authority of the House of Representatives Committee on Public Petitions to investigate matters arising from a banker–customer dispute between the bank and Miden Systems Limited and its principal, Innocent Brendan Usoro.
According to court filings, the dispute stems from a loan facility of about $17.079 million granted to Miden Systems Limited in 2009.
Sterling Bank stated that the facility was later restructured after the borrower allegedly failed to meet repayment obligations.
The bank further said that recovery proceedings were initiated following the alleged default, culminating in a consent judgment of the Federal High Court in which the borrower reportedly admitted liability of about $31.3 million.
Despite the subsisting judgment and other pending legal proceedings relating to the debt, the plaintiffs alleged that petitions were subsequently submitted to the House Committee on Public Petitions.
They further claimed that the petitions prompted the committee to begin investigations and led to criminal complaints being referred to law enforcement authorities against the bank and some of its officials.
In the present suit, the plaintiffs are asking the court to determine whether the National Assembly (Nigeria) has the constitutional authority to investigate or summon private individuals and corporate entities in matters not connected with its law-making functions, particularly when such matters are already before a court.
During Wednesday’s hearing, counsel for the plaintiffs also reminded the court of its earlier order issued on July 18, 2025, which directed that no action should be taken regarding the criminal allegations until the substantive case is decided.
The court was informed that despite the existing directive, certain criminal complaints and related actions had allegedly been initiated in connection with the dispute.
Also read: Zomay Marine, Sterling Bank resolve bitter debt dispute
After hearing the submissions, Justice Osiagor reaffirmed the court’s earlier order, directing all parties to maintain the status quo and refrain from taking further steps concerning the criminal allegations until the substantive issues in the suit are resolved.
