Law

Add as a preferred source on Google

Nigerian Court Allows UBA to Serve WEMPCO Directors by Substituted Service

The notices concern alleged disobedience of an earlier order in a debt-recovery case involving a reported N61.45 billion claim. The ruling does not decide whether the directors breached the order.

Updated 2 min read
People approach a courthouse entrance in Lagos, Nigeria, beneath an overcast sky. (AI-generated image / EconoTimes)
People approach a courthouse entrance in Lagos, Nigeria, beneath an overcast sky. (AI-generated image / EconoTimes)

Reports by TheCable and TheNigeriaLawyer say a Lagos court authorized United Bank for Africa Plc to serve nine Western Metal Products Company (WEMPCO) directors by substituted service in a contempt case over an earlier court order.

Justice Akintayo Aluko approved UBA’s application, the outlets reported. The application sought substituted service of Form 49 notices. UBA had filed a contempt suit against the directors in connection with alleged disobedience of the earlier order in a debt-recovery case, according to the reports. The reports were published Oct. 23.

TheCable, citing UBA’s counsel, reported that the bank wanted the directors to answer the contempt allegations in court. Counsel alleged that the directors and some WEMPCO employees acted contrary to the order. The reports do not say the court found that they had disobeyed it.

The reports identify these nine directors: Taiwo Alli, Tung Lawrence Blake, C.L. Ip, Tung Robert, Aali Aare Hadji Tokunbo, Lewis Shui Ngor Tung, Phillip Shui Chei Tung, Paul Shui Po Tung and M.A. Ola Yusuf.

Reports put UBA’s claimed debt at N61,445,695,993.76, or about 61.45 billion naira. Earlier coverage says a court order in the debt-recovery case imposed a Mareva injunction over some WEMPCO assets and appointed a receiver/manager. The reports do not describe the claimed amount as a final court award.

Nigeria’s Judgment (Enforcement) Rules set out the committal procedure. Form 49 follows service of an order endorsed with Form 48 and must be issued no less than two clear days after that service. The court may consider committal if it is satisfied that the order was disobeyed and the required notices were served.

The reported substituted-service decision addresses how the notices may be delivered. It does not determine whether the directors breached the order or commit them to prison. The notices form part of the process for requiring the directors to respond before a court considers possible committal.

Related articles

View all