Just In : Falana withdraws suit challenging Polaris Bank sale
The Federal High Court in Lagos on Wednesday dismissed a suit filed by human rights lawyer, Femi Falana (SAN), challenging the sale of Polaris Bank.
Justice Lewis Allagoa dismissed the suit following an application filed by Falana, who was the plaintiff in the matter, seeking to discontinue the suit.
Falana had filed the suit marked HC/l/CS/87c/23 against the Central Bank of Nigeria and Polaris Bank Nigeria Ltd.
In his originating summons, he asked the court to determine “whether, by the provisions of Section 42(2) of the Banks and Other Financial Institutions Act 2020, and Public Procurement Act, 2007, the CBN could validly sell Polaris Bank for N50bn having earlier revitalised same for N1.3tn.”
He also sought a declaration that the purported sale of Polaris Bank by the CBN on October 19, 2022, was illegal and violates the Public Procurement Act, 2007; and the provisions of the Banks and Other Related Institutions Act 2020.
At the resumed hearing of the matter on Wednesday, Falana announced an appearance for himself; while Augustine Okafor appeared for the CBN and Olabisi Makanjuola for Polaris Bank.
Falana informed the court that he was discontinuing the suit following the takeover of Polaris Bank by the Federal Government.
According to him, the Federal Government, having found that the sale of the bank was illegal, had decided to take over the bank.
In response, the CBN’s lawyer, Makanjuola, said since the parties had already joined issues, the court should dismiss the suit rather than strike it out.
Our correspondent reports that a suit that is struck out can be refiled, while one dismissed cannot be refiled.
The CBN’s lawyer also contended that Falana had yet to pay the N200,000 awarded against him by the court at the last hearing.
In his response, Falana said the defence counsel should rather thank him for opting to withdraw the suit.
After listening to the lawyer, Justice Allagoa said Falana would not be punished because he filed the suit in the interest of the public.
The judge subsequently dismissed the suit.
