Ar Security Solution Limited V. Economic & Financial Crimes Commission (2018)

LAWGLOBAL HUB Lead Judgment Report

MUSA DATTIJO MUHAMMAD, J.S.C.

This is an appeal against the judgment of the Court of Appeal, Abuja Division, hereinafter referred to as the lower Court, in Appeal No. CA/A/306/2016, affirming the ruling of the Federal High Court sitting at Abuja, hereinafter referred to as the trial Court. The ruling of the trial Court dated 22nd April 2016 which the lower Court’s judgment delivered on 25th July 2017 affirmed arose in the course of proceedings in suit FHC/ABJ/CS/1054/2015.

The brief facts of the case that brought about the appeal are hereinunder supplied.

Following its Exparte Originating Summons dated 21st day of December 2015, the trial Court granted the respondent leave to completely freeze the operation of accounts specified in Forms B of the Schedule to the EFCC Act 2004 attached to the summons and further empowered the respondent to receive such information in respect of the frozen accounts from the managers of the banks and/or persons in whose control the designated accounts abide for six months.

Affected by the interim freezing order on its accounts with the Heritage Bank, the appellant applied that the trial Courts

1

order dated 25th January 2015 be set-aside. The appellants application was refused and dismissed by the trial Court.

Dissatisfied, the appellant appealed to the lower Court on a notice containing five grounds filed on 4th May 2016. The dismissal of the appeal informs appellants further appeal to this Court. Its notice of appeal which contains four grounds spans pages 155-161 of the record was filed on the 15th day of August 2017.

At paragraph 3 of the appellants brief settled by Mazi Afam Osigwe of counsel, the two issues distilled as arising for the determination of the appeal read:

(i) Whether the mere investigation and/or arrest of an person for an offence under Economic and Financial Crimes Commission Act discharges the Respondent from the burden of establishing there is prime facie evidence for the attachment or forfeiture of the persons’ property or assets.

(ii) Whether the Court below was right in affirming the trial court’s decision temporarily freezing Appellant’s accounts.

The two issues distilled at page 5 of the respondent’s brief settled by learned counsel Benjamin Lawan Manji Esq. read:-

2

(i) Whether this appeal is not otiose, academic, destitute of any utilitarian value and therefore liable to be dismissed.