The Court of Appeal sitting in Port Harcourt has discharged and vacated the interim order that froze 124 bank accounts belonging to businesswoman and Oceangate Engineering Oil & Gas Limited founder, Aisha Achimugu, and several corporate entities linked to her
.In a unanimous judgment delivered by a three-member panel led by Justice Muhammad Ibrahim Sirajo, with Justices Ishaq Mohammed Sani and Eleojo Enenche concurring, the appellate court ruled that the ex parte freezing order issued by the Federal High Court on April 10, 2025, could not remain in force indefinitely.
The accounts were initially frozen following an application by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), which also directed banks to halt outward transactions on the affected accounts.
Achimugu subsequently approached the Federal High Court, arguing that the freezing order had been abused after the EFCC allegedly instructed SunTrust Bank to transfer ₦1.8 billion from one of the frozen accounts into a Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN)/EFCC recovery account while the order was still in effect.
In August 2025, the trial court ruled that the transfer was unlawful and ordered the immediate reversal of the funds. Dissatisfied with that decision, the EFCC appealed, arguing that the lower court lacked jurisdiction to deliver its ruling during the court’s annual vacation, denied the commission a fair hearing, and failed to properly evaluate evidence relating to the affected accounts.
However, the Court of Appeal dismissed the commission’s arguments on jurisdiction and fair hearing, holding that delivering a reserved judgment during the court’s vacation was lawful and that both parties had been adequately heard through their affidavits and counter-affidavits.
The appellate court also affirmed that a trial court has the authority to make consequential orders necessary to preserve the subject matter of a case. However, after reviewing the evidence, the court found that the ₦1.8 billion transferred by the EFCC did not originate from any of the accounts covered by the original freezing order.
It therefore set aside the lower court’s directive ordering the reversal of the funds, stating that the evidence did not establish that the money came from a frozen account.
The court clarified that this finding should not be interpreted as endorsing the legality of the EFCC’s decision to transfer the funds.
On the substantive application challenging the freezing order, the Court of Appeal held that allowing an ex parte order to remain in force for more than 15 months amounted to an abuse of court process and undermined the rule of law.
The court stressed that ex parte freezing orders are intended to be temporary measures designed to preserve assets only until a motion on notice is heard and determined.
Consequently, the appellate court discharged and vacated in its entirety the Federal High Court’s April 10, 2025 order freezing Achimugu’s accounts and those of the corporate entities linked to her.
