Reported by: Oahimire Omone Precious | Edited by: Oravbiere Osayomore Promise.
The Federal High Court in Lagos has urged the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN), the Nigeria Inter-Bank Settlement System Plc (NIBSS), Enterprise Logistics Speciale Limited, Avanage Nigeria Limited and other parties to make genuine efforts to resolve a N98.5 billion patent infringement dispute through an amicable settlement before the commencement of trial.
The directive was given on Tuesday by Justice Deinde Dipeolu after the court declined to commence trial because three of the defendants—the Central Bank of Nigeria, Avanage Nigeria Limited and the Registrar of Patents and Designs—were not represented by legal counsel during the proceedings.
The judge ruled that, in the interest of justice, hearing notices should first be served on the absent parties before the case proceeds. He also reminded counsel of the provisions of the Federal High Court Act, which encourage judges to facilitate amicable resolution of disputes where possible, urging all parties to engage in meaningful settlement discussions before returning to court.
The lawsuit was instituted by Enterprise Logistics Speciale Limited and its Managing Director, Samuel Kolajo, who are seeking approximately N98.5 billion in damages. The plaintiffs allege that their patented cash management technology was unlawfully infringed upon, that a Non-Disclosure Agreement (NDA) was breached, and that they suffered significant financial losses after their cash management solution was allegedly excluded from Nigeria's national payment infrastructure.
According to court documents, the dispute centres on a series of patented financial technology innovations developed by the plaintiffs over several years. The technologies reportedly include systems for smart cash deposits, mobile cash sorting and processing, cash recycling, retail cash management and the PillarSalt Cash and Terminal Management System, all of which are protected under Nigerian patent certificates. The plaintiffs contend that these inventions formed the foundation of a cash management framework later adopted without their authorisation.
At the hearing, Senior Advocate of Nigeria Tayo Oyetibo appeared for the plaintiffs alongside members of his legal team, while Olaoluwa Ale-Daniel represented NIBSS. Counsel informed the court that the matter had been scheduled for trial and that the plaintiffs' witness was present and ready to testify. However, Justice Dipeolu held that it would be inappropriate to proceed in the absence of legal representation for all defendants and adjourned substantive proceedings pending proper service of hearing notices.
During arguments before the court, counsel for NIBSS maintained that the payment system operator functions strictly under the regulatory oversight of the Central Bank of Nigeria and therefore lacks the authority to make unilateral decisions regarding access to the national payment infrastructure. He further argued that NIBSS opposes any arrangement capable of creating a monopoly within Nigeria's financial payment system, suggesting that monopoly concerns lie at the heart of the dispute.
In response, Oyetibo argued that the plaintiffs invested substantial resources, expertise and time in developing their patented technologies and are legally entitled to the exclusive commercial benefits arising from those inventions. He maintained that the technologies are protected intellectual property and that any unauthorised use amounts to patent infringement under Nigerian law.
The senior advocate further submitted that, if deployed, the plaintiffs' cash management solution would significantly improve Nigeria's cash handling system, reduce operational costs, enhance efficiency within the banking sector and contribute positively to the country's economy. He also argued that the prolonged dispute has deprived Nigeria of innovations capable of modernising its cash management framework.
According to Oyetibo, one of the major obstacles to resolving the dispute has been what he described as the "selfish interests" of certain individuals in positions of authority, whom he alleged had frustrated the implementation of the patented technology despite its potential national benefits. Nevertheless, he informed the court that the plaintiffs remain open to genuine settlement discussions if conducted in good faith.
The dispute has attracted significant attention within Nigeria's financial and legal sectors because it concerns intellectual property rights relating to technologies designed for managing cash movement within the country's banking system. Legal analysts note that the eventual outcome could have important implications for innovation protection, technology licensing and the relationship between private inventors and public financial institutions.
Justice Dipeolu subsequently directed all parties to engage in sincere negotiations before the next adjourned date, expressing hope that the matter could be resolved without the need for a prolonged trial. Should settlement efforts fail, the case is expected to proceed with the presentation of evidence and witness testimony once all parties have been properly served and represented before the court.
📩 Stone Reporters News | 🌍 stonereportersnews.com
✉️ info@stonereportersnews.com | 📘 Facebook: Stone Reporters News | 🐦 X (Twitter): @StoneReportNew | 📸 Instagram: @stonereportersnews
Add comment
Comments