Breaking News
Translate

No UK court judgment against Akingbola

Kindly Share This Story:

Former Managing Director of Intercontinental Bank, Dr. Erastus Akingbola, has denied report that a court in the United Kingdom, UK, has ordered his forfeiture of asset worth  £68 million.

Reacting to the report Tuesday in a statement signed by Charles Nwajagu, Media Counsel to Dr Akingbola, he said:

“All allegations regarding payments are misleading. No court has asked Akingbola to forfeit any asset or pay £68 million (Sixty eight million pounds) or any other sum to Intercontinental Bank Plc. The case indeed has been slated for trial next year.”

The statement said in part: “Our attention has been drawn to a misleading campaign on the case in United Kingdom (UK) involving Intercontinental Bank Plc and its former Chief Executive Officer, Dr Erastus Akingbola, in which the bank was asking for a Summary Judgment on financial misappropriation. Intercontinental Bank had on December 23, 2009 instituted the case against Dr Akingbola. On April 4, 2011, a ruling was given by the presiding judge. We state hereunder the facts as follows:

“The Bank’s application for Summary Judgment was declined. A summary judgment would have meant no trial and no cross examination too. But the judge refused on the ground that it is only fair for a defendant (in this case Dr Akingbola) to cross examine the plaintiff’s witnesses. Consequently, the judge ordered trial to start sometime next year.

All allegations regarding payments are misleading. No court has asked Akingbola to forfeit any asset or pay £68 million (Sixty eight million pounds) or any other sum to Intercontinental Bank PLC. The case indeed has been slated for trial next year.”

“In his ruling the judge affirmed that none of Intercontinental Bank’s money was used by Akingbola to purchase any property in London.

These allegations are actually reminiscent of the spurious N 346 billion phantom money allegedly misappropriated at Intercontinental Bank PLC by Dr Akingbola.

“Contrary to the erroneous March 24, 2011 being spread around, the judge gave his ruling only on Monday, April 4, 2011 thereby casting doubt on the motive and credibility of the story being circulated.

Kindly Share This Story:
All rights reserved. This material and any other digital content on this platform may not be reproduced, published, broadcast, written or distributed in full or in part, without written permission from VANGUARD NEWS.

Disclaimer

Comments expressed here do not reflect the opinions of vanguard newspapers or any employee thereof.
Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!