A Federal High Court sitting in Ikoyi, Lagos, has ordered Access Bank Plc to pay a total of N16m in damages to some customers for unlawfully placing post-no-debit restrictions on their accounts without sufficient legal justification.
The judgment, delivered on June 1, 2026, by Justice Chukwujekwu Joseph Aneke in suit number FHC/L/CS/878/2023, faulted the bank’s action, describing it as arbitrary and unsupported by law.
The court held that financial institutions must operate strictly within legal provisions when restricting customers’ accounts, warning that such actions cannot be based on mere suspicion or unverified links to transactions.
Justice Aneke, after reviewing arguments from both parties, ruled that the first plaintiff lacked the locus standi to sue the bank, having no contractual relationship with it, and consequently dismissed his claims.
However, the court found merit in the cases of the second, third, fourth, and fifth plaintiffs, ruling that there was no evidence linking them to any illegal cryptocurrency activities to justify the restrictions placed on their accounts.
The judge noted that while the first plaintiff engaged in cryptocurrency transactions outside Nigeria, particularly in the Benin Republic where such activities were not proven to be illegal, this could not serve as a basis to penalise other customers who merely received funds from him for legitimate purposes.
On the second plaintiff, the court held that Access Bank acted wrongfully by maintaining a restriction on the account despite the absence of any evidence of involvement in cryptocurrency trading. The court awarded N5m in damages and ordered the immediate lifting of the restriction.
In the case of the fourth plaintiff, Justice Aneke described the situation as “particularly unfortunate,” noting that the funds in question were mistakenly transferred into his account without any allegation of fraud.
The court held that although a customary court had ordered a reversal of the erroneous payment, Access Bank exceeded its powers by imposing a post-no-debit restriction without a valid court order authorising such action. The bank was consequently ordered to pay N10m in damages and lift the restriction on the account.
Regarding the third plaintiff, the court acknowledged that an earlier court order initially justified the restriction. However, it ruled that the continued freezing of the account was no longer tenable in the absence of any criminal charge or prosecution, stressing the constitutional presumption of innocence.
The court also noted that the fifth plaintiff was not involved in cryptocurrency trading and that the restriction on his account had already been lifted.
Justice Aneke emphasised that banks are bound to comply strictly with court orders where they exist but warned against imposing indefinite restrictions without legal backing.
“No evidence was presented to show that the restrictions were based on suspicious transaction volumes,” the court observed, adding that the actions were largely predicated on alleged links to cryptocurrency dealings and purported court directives.
In addition to the damages, the court awarded N500,000 each as costs to the second and fourth plaintiffs.
The ruling underscores the judiciary’s stance that customers’ funds cannot be arbitrarily withheld and that financial institutions must respect due process in the exercise of their regulatory powers.
FOLLOW US
FOR MORE HERE
More details here…
