Court Dismisses UBA Appeal, Upholds N9m Damages Over Wrongful Restriction Of Customer’s Account

The Ondo State High Court sitting in Okitipupa has dismissed an appeal by United Bank for Africa (UBA) Plc challenging a N9 million damages award against it for negligence and breach of its duty of care to a customer whose account was restricted for over six months.

In a judgment delivered on October 13, 2026, in appeal number HOK/9A/2025, Justice L.B. Ologun affirmed the judgment of the Okitipupa Chief Magistrate Court, which had awarded N9 million in general damages and N60,000 in costs to the customer, Mr Felix Oyeneyin.

The court held that UBA failed to exercise reasonable care and diligence before restricting Oyeneyin’s account and did not act promptly after he complained.

The dispute arose after Oyeneyin, who operated an account at UBA’s Okitipupa branch, discovered in January 2023 that he could no longer access his funds. The bank informed him that a lien, or post-no-debit restriction, had been placed on his account pursuant to a garnishee order issued by a Lagos Magistrate Court.

Oyeneyin challenged the restriction, insisting he did not know the judgment creditor and had never transacted with him. He also argued that the garnishee order did not contain his account number, address, or other identifying particulars linking him to the judgment debtor.

Despite his complaint, the restriction remained until August 2, 2023.

UBA argued that it merely complied with a valid garnishee order issued by a court of competent jurisdiction and therefore could not be held negligent. It also contended that a letter written by Oyeneyin’s solicitor amounted to an admission that he was the person involved in the garnishee proceedings, and that the damages awarded were excessive.

Justice Ologun rejected the argument, holding that compliance alone was insufficient.

“The issue is not about compliance with a valid order of court but about ensuring that a customer that is affected by the order of court is the one whose account is being restricted,” the judge held.

He noted that the order served on UBA contained only the name “Felix Oyeneyin” without an account number or other identifiers, a fact admitted by the bank’s sole witness under cross-examination.

“A blanket obedience of court order without due diligence in this circumstance, apparently fractured the hallowed contractual relationship between a bank and its customers,” Justice Ologun stated.

The judge said a prudent bank would have sought further information to verify the identity of the judgment debtor before restricting the customer’s funds or at least informed him promptly.

The court also faulted UBA’s handling of the complaint. Oyeneyin’s evidence that he spent hours at the branch from 9am to 2pm seeking explanation, and his insistence that he neither knew nor owed the judgment creditor, was not controverted.

“Instead of the Appellant which owes the Respondent a duty of reasonable care and skill in the operation of the Respondent’s account to act with promptness, show care and concern, it merely informed the Respondent to go to Lagos all the way from Okitipupa to have the problem sorted out. Thus, treating him with levity and subjecting him to hardship,” the judge said.

The court further held that UBA failed to establish that it complied with the part of the garnishee order requiring it to file an affidavit to show cause within 14 days. The judge said timely compliance would have enabled the issuing court to consider the matter on the return date of March 3, 2023, but the restriction was only lifted on August 2, 2023.

Justice Ologun said the failure to produce the affidavit justified the trial court’s reliance on Section 167(d) of the Evidence Act, 2011.

On the solicitor’s letter, the court held that it had to be read as a whole and could not conclusively establish that Oyeneyin was the judgment debtor.

Citing Supreme Court decisions including Agbanelo v. UBN Ltd (2000) and GTB Plc v. Yunusa (2024), the court reiterated that banks owe customers a duty of reasonable care and skill.

“In conclusion, I find no merit in this appeal and is accordingly dismissed. The judgment of the trial court delivered on the 29th September, 2025 is hereby affirmed,” Justice Ologun held.

The ruling leaves in place the original award of N9 million in general damages and N60,000 in costs.

UBA was represented by Sanmi Owoeye, while Solomon Tunya, alongside E. E. Ojubulu and B. J. Jolowo, represented Oyeneyin.

The judgment was delivered on October 13, 2026, and a certified true copy was issued on October 14, 2026.