FCT High Court Dismisses FHT Mega Express Suit Against Parallex Bank, Awards ₦500,000 Costs
The Federal Capital Territory (FCT) High Court has dismissed a ₦7.1 billion suit filed by logistics firm FHT Mega Express Limited against Parallex Bank Limited, ruling that the case constituted a gross abuse of court process.
In its judgment delivered on April 20, 2026, the court upheld the bank’s preliminary objection and struck out the suit in its entirety. It also awarded costs of ₦500,000 against FHT Mega Express in favour of Parallex Bank.
The dispute arose after FHT Mega Express secured an ex parte order to freeze funds belonging to Parallex Bank up to ₦7.1 billion with the Central Bank of Nigeria. The bank challenged the order, arguing that the suit was abusive, especially as it had already filed an earlier case against the company in Lagos to recover outstanding debts.
According to court records, Parallex Bank had, on September 4, 2025, filed a suit before the Federal High Court in Lagos seeking to recover ₦4.5 billion owed by FHT Mega Express. The debt was linked to Letters of Credit issued to finance import transactions valued in millions of euros.
Justice Lewis Allagoa of the Federal High Court had previously ordered all parties to maintain the status quo pending the determination of the case. However, FHT Mega Express was accused of filing multiple suits in different jurisdictions, a move described by the bank as forum shopping.
The company reportedly withdrew a similar case in Lagos before initiating the Abuja suit with nearly identical claims and seeking fresh ex parte orders.
Parallex Bank further alleged that FHT Mega Express concealed critical information from the Abuja court, including the existence of the earlier Lagos case, the subsisting court order to maintain status quo, and its unsuccessful attempt to obtain similar orders in Lagos.
In its ruling, the FCT High Court agreed with the bank, holding that the company acted in bad faith and deliberately abused judicial processes by duplicating cases across jurisdictions.
Reacting to the judgment, sources close to Parallex Bank described the ruling as a victory for due process, transparency, and the rule of law, reaffirming the bank’s commitment to corporate governance and ethical practices.
Legal analysts say the decision highlights the judiciary’s firm stance against procedural abuse in commercial disputes and is likely to serve as a reference point in future banking litigation involving forum shopping.
The ruling also clears the path for Parallex Bank to pursue recovery of the disputed funds through lawful means while protecting its financial and reputational interests.
