Dunalin Inv. Ltd v BGL Plc & Anor

BriefBot Summary

Free

- The appellant sued both respondents claiming that the loan was illegal and that the 1st Respondent made negligent misrepresentations. - The lower court dismissed the appellant's claims and granted the 2nd Respondent's counterclaim. - The

Case Details

Suit Number:CA/L /146/2013

Judges:AMINA ADAMU AUGIE , J.C.A ( Presided and read the lead judgement) TIJJANI ABUBAKAR, J.C.A. ABIMBOLA OSARUGUE OBASEKI-ADEJUMO, J.C.A

Counsel:Emeka C. Nwosu, Esq. (with him, Justice Aninworie, Esq) for the Appellant M.E Esonanjor , Esq. ( with him, Barbara Ehirim [miss], P.O Ndukwu, Esq) for the first respondent Abiodun Olaler, Esq (with him, B.J Akinsete, Esq and C. Onyeanagaziri, Esq.) for the 2nd Respondent

AUGIE, J.C.A. (Delivering the leading Judgment): This appeal touches on illegality, and revolves around a loan facility granted to the appellant by the 2nd Respondent, to purchase shares in the 1st Respondent, who acts as its financial adviser/stockbroker, managed its stock and investments.

The Appellant sued both Respondents at the Lagos State High Court wherein it claimed as follows in its amended writ of summons and statement of Claim-

1. A declaration that the shares purchase loan arranged between the defendants in the sum of ₦34,300,000 and obtained “on behalf” of the Claimant by the 1st Defendant from the 2nd Defendant towards the acquisition of ₦7,000,000.00 units of the 1st Defendant, BGL Plc’s shares was illegal for being contrary to section 159 of the Companies and Allied Matters Act [CAMA] 2004. And thus null, void and of no binding force in contract on the claimant.

2. A Declaration that the 1st Defendant made negligent misrepresentations and misstatement and wrongly misadvi…

BriefBot Summary

Case Details

There's more. Sign in to continue reading.