Court orders Skye Bank to take over intercontinental hotel

Court orders Skye Bank to take over intercontinental hotel


The Federal High Court in Lagos has ordered Skye Bank Plc to take
over Intercontinental Hotel, a five-star hotel in Lagos, over an alleged
debt.

The bank claimed that it loaned Milan Industries Ltd, the
defendant and proprietor of the hotel, with facilities to the sum of
$29.8million and N3.8billion for the hotel’s construction, a 361 room
hotel on Plot 244 and 245 (now 52) Kofo Abayomi Street on Victoria
Island in Lagos.

The bank said it also raised an overdraft
facility of N500million “to urgently fund payments to contractors and
importation of material required for completing the hotel project”
claiming that the defendant executed a deed of legal mortgage in favour
of the bank with the 361-room five star hotels as collateral.

Skye
Bank said it was left with no choice than to appoint a receiver/manager
in line with the registered deed of legal mortgage and appointed Kunle
Ogunba (SAN).

In his ruling, Justice Babs Kuewumi granted leave to
Ogunba to preserve the defendant’s traceable assets with an interim
order granting judicial protection to Ogunba, whose appointment as the
receiver-manager was by virtue of a deed of appointment dated November
11, 2016 in furtherance of a deed of legal mortgage.

Justice Kuewumi also granted an interim injunction restraining the
defendant and its agents from interfering with or obstructing Ogunba in
the course of performance of his duties as receiver-manager over the
defendant’s charged assets and properties.

The judge ordered all
banks and financial institutions as well as other agencies contractually
obligated to the Milan Industries to furnish the receiver with details
of sums outstanding to the defendant’s credit.

Justice Kuewumi
further directed the Assistant Inspector-General of Police, Zone 2 and
the Commandants of the Nigerian Civil Defence Corps (NSCDC) or their
agents where the defendant’s assets may be situated, to assist the
receiver/manager in performing his duties.

“The plaintiff shall
file an undertaking to indemnify the defendant should it turn out that
this order ought not to have been made,” the judge added.

The case has been adjourned till May 17.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *