The Court of Appeal, Abuja, on Friday dismissed the appeal filed by the Nigerian Agricultural Insurance Corporation (NAIC) against First Bank of Nigeria over a N200 billion Commercial Agriculture Credit Scheme disbursement dispute dating back to 2013.

In seven landmark judgements delivered in six hours by Justice Okon Abang on Friday, the court held that the NAIC, by applying to withdraw the suit at the Federal High Court, Abuja at the time when issues had been joined, was “only being smart, believing that it could cunningly manipulate judicial proceedings to save a suit that appears weak and manifestly unsupported.”

The judgement followed NAIC’s appeal against the decision of the Federal High Court, Abuja, delivered by Justice A.R. Mohammed in March 2015.

The appellant had filed an originating summons seeking declaratory reliefs against the bank over the disbursement of the N200 billion scheme fund of the Federal Government.

At the trial court, NAIC argued that First Bank was one of the disbursing banks that allegedly failed to deduct the 2.5% premium payable to it at the time.

Its originating processes were served on the bank, which responded by filing a counter-affidavit and written address opposing the substantive suit.

Several adjournments reportedly followed the case since 2013, with the bank also filing further affidavits against NAIC.

NAIC eventually applied to withdraw the suit, claiming in its supporting affidavit that Mr. Jubril Aku, a representative of the Bankers’ Committee, had approached it for an out-of-court settlement.

In response, the bank’s legal team argued that the appellant filed the application to withdraw the suit without its consent.

“The application to discontinue the suit was brought after parties had exchanged pleadings and the matter fixed for hearing,” the bank had stated.

The respondent further argued that the consequential order to be made against NAIC should be a dismissal of the suit, failing which the bank would be prejudiced.

NAIC countered by stating in an affidavit supporting its withdrawal notice that Mr. Aku had consistently engaged the appellant seeking an out-of-court settlement for all cases filed by it against the respondent and other banks.

NAIC argued that the proper order the trial court ought to make was to strike out the case.

However, the trial court dismissed the suit.

Naijaonpoint reports that when a case is struck out, a party may refile it, but once dismissed, it cannot be refiled.

Dissatisfied with the dismissal, NAIC appealed, asking the Court of Appeal to allow the appeal and set aside the dismissal order, replacing it with a striking out in the interest of justice.

However, the bank urged the Appeal Court to uphold the dismissal and determine whether the trial court properly exercised its discretion in dismissing the suit considering the peculiar circumstances.

Passing his judgement, Justice Okong Abang held that NAIC’s argument against First Bank was “grossly misconceived.”

“An order striking out the suit would only have been possible if the application to withdraw the suit was filed before service of the respondent’s counter-affidavit,” he said.

The judge quoted the trial court’s ruling:

“Now, since it is clear that the plaintiff is not willing to proceed with its case, the court will not force the plaintiff to do so. However, since issues have been joined and the matter has previously been adjourned on several occasions, the proper order to make on the application of the plaintiff is to dismiss the suit.”

“What beats my imagination is that having withdrawn the application to join the Bankers’ Committee, and the same struck out on 22 October 2013, what could have encouraged the appellant to file an application to withdraw the suit in December 2013 on the alleged intervention of a non-party?” he queried.

“It is reasonably believed that upon sighting the respondent’s counter-affidavit, the appellant became apprehensive that its case would be dismissed.”

“This cannot be allowed under our watch. The appellant cannot command the impossible. The trial court was right to dismiss the suit.”

Naijaonpoint reports that the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) has at various times dedicated funds to agricultural financing through several intervention schemes.

The objective has been to resuscitate the agricultural sector, which contributes significantly to GDP and employs a substantial portion of the labour force.

One notable scheme was the Commercial Agriculture Credit Scheme (CACS) established in 2009.

It was financed through a N200 billion bond raised by the Debt Management Office (DMO).

At the time, loans were granted to qualified companies at a maximum interest rate of 9%.