The High Court granted an interlocutory order for release of a fuel consignment, finding the applicant had shown a prima facie case and that the balance of convenience favored relief.
The SBLC/LC facility agreement dated 22 May 2019 (Exh.P-3) was executed by all three Plaintiffs and the Defendants, but the secured event—a foreign loan facility from Lamar to all three Plaintiffs—never materialized. Only the 1st Plaintiff entered a facility agreement with Lamar (Exh.P-7), and the SBLC/LC contemplated under Exh.P-3 was never issued by the 2nd Defendant. The Letter of Credit (Exh.D-10) issued by the 2nd Defendant was not the SBLC/LC contemplated under Exh.P-3, but was instead based on a separate, undisclosed sale and buy-back transaction involving heavy equipment, for which no…
The High Court Commercial Division ordered the 3rd respondent to appear and show cause after funds were debited under a letter of credit despite an earlier restraint order.
The High Court dismissed a plaintiff’s claim for damages over delays under a facility letter and allowed the bank’s counterclaim for the outstanding loan amount.
Plaintiff failed to prove proper administration of letters of credit, existence of contract between plaintiff and 2nd defendant, and the alleged outstanding sum; suit dismissed for failure to discharge burden of proof.