By BARTHOLOMEW MADUKWE

Managers of First Bank Nigeria (FBN) Plc and Power Holding Company of Nigeria (PHCN) may face contempt charges at the Lagos High Court Igbosere over a dispute arising from breach of contribution in Barge Power Purchase Agreement entered into by PHCN and Lagos State Government in 2000.

Applicant in the suit, Mr. Olasupo Shasore SAN (also counsel to Lagos State government) informed the court that PHCN and First Bank Plc have disobeyed the ex-perte order of Mareva injunction made against them (PHCN and FBN) on May 16, 2012 and sought to know why they disobeyed even after admitting service.

He said: “The first and second respondents have disobeyed the order of the court and the rule is that they should not come to the court to which they have disobeyed for favour. They were served the order on May 22, 2012 but they still went ahead to transact on their account.”

Urging the court to stand the matter down until the respondents depose under oath an affidavit of compliance to the order, Shasore held that various sums of money were on May 23 (a day after they were served) withdrawn from the accounts of the first respondent held with the second respondent running into billions of naira against the orders of the court, noting it was a deliberate action aimed at scorning the order.

Counsel to the first defendant, Mr. Babatunde Ajibade SAN had brought a motion on notice seeking to vacate the ex-perte order of Mareva injunction, which forecloses transactions in the accounts of PHCN with First Bank and another bank.

The motion, which is supported by a 28-paragraph affidavit deposed to by one Matthias Dawodu was not opposed by the applicants counsel. But the applicants counsel insisted that that motion cannot be moved until the firms clear the allegations of disobedience to court order.

Ajibade argued that since the order was served on the respondents on May 22 and the withdrawals took place a day later, it means that it was inadvertently done. According to him, the management of PHCN did not receive the order by the time the transactions took place.

“The order that my learned silk is referring to has elapsed by effusion of time on the 23 of May because the order was to last for only 7 days. Since it was made on May 16, it has elapsed according to the rules or the court. I disagree with the oral application of my learned silk seeking to extend the order.

“He supposed to do so appropriately. If my colleague would not allow us to move the application to discharge the order for alleged disobedience which we said was done inadvertently, I submit that the order has elapsed and the application for extension do not apply”, he declared.

Counsel to First Bank, Mr. Bayo Akinsola said the applicant had alluded to the fact that monies were withdrawn from the account after the order but refuse to acknowledge that there were also some lodgments into the account. He stated that they would respond appropriately to the allegations at the right time.