Court of Appeal overturns N20m damages against First Bank in landmark ruling
The Court of Appeal has voided the N20 million general damages awarded in favor of Biatemp Ventures Limited by a Federal High Court against First Bank of Nigeria. This is according to a certified true copy of the judgment, exclusively obtained by our facebook, which was delivered by a three-man panel of the Appeal Court led by Justice A.A. Banjoko on February 4, 2026. At the trial court, the bank and the Federal Inland Revenue Service (FIRS) were embroiled in a N20 billion special damages litigation commenced by Biatemp Ventures, bordering on the alleged manipulation of its domiciliary account and tax obligations. In the trial court's judgment, it held that Biatemp did not prove that its account was manipulated but awarded N20 million against the bank and FIRS for alleged 'embarrassment and reputational damage.' Delivering the lead judgment, Justice Banjoko, having reviewed the case, held that the trial court did not identify any independent wrongful act attributable to the bank. He said that the delay in the issuance of the Tax Clearance Certificate was traced to an investigation by the FIRS and not to any proven misconduct by the bank. He stressed that in the absence of a proven breach of duty, negligence, or other actionable wrong against the bank, the award of general damages becomes legally unsustainable. The judge explained that while Biatemp Ventures had contended that the lower court had the discretion to still award general damages, it must be noted that discretion to award damages is not at large but must be exercised judicially and judiciously, based on sound legal principles and established facts. Justice Banjoko said the Supreme Court had reaffirmed that an appellate court will interfere where discretion is exercised on wrong principles or without regard to relevant considerations. In the instant case, the trial court exercised its discretion to award general damages after expressly exonerating the appellant of the alleged wrongdoing. This constitutes a clear instance of discretion exercised on a wrong principle, thereby warranting interference by this Court, he said. In the final analysis, the Appeal Court held that the learned trial judge was wrong to award general damages in the absence of a proven wrongful act against the bank. The award of N20,000,000 as general damages is inconsistent with the court's own findings and cannot be allowed to stand, he said. The judge concluded that the judgment of the lower court with regard to the award of damages is accordingly set aside.
Read also:
- American teenagers taking up farming roles previously filled by immigrants, a concept revisited from 1965's labor market shift.
- Weekly affairs in the German Federal Parliament (Bundestag)
- Landslide claims seven lives, injures six individuals while they work to restore a water channel in the northern region of Pakistan
- Escalating conflict in Sudan has prompted the United Nations to announce a critical gender crisis, highlighting the disproportionate impact of the ongoing violence on women and girls.
