Letter of credit is one of the international payment terms. After completion of export formalities at customs, the seller collects original BoL from the carrier. The said original BoL along with othershipping docs are submitted along with the LC to the seller’s bank. After satisfying with the terms and conditions (T/C) of the LC, the seller’s bank negotiates the document and sends it to the buyer’s bank. The buyer’s bank notifies buyerand instructs him to accept documents. Buyer accepts and makes to clear goods.He surrenders Original BoL with carrier and takes delivery of goods
The point is, without the Original bill of laden, the buyer cannot take delivery of goods. The buyer’s bank delivers original BoL only after receiving the export proceeds (value of goods shipped or percentage of the value of goods agreed). So do you see why the Original Bill of Laden is very important to this forgery case? It seems like both GTBank and Innoson are lying claims to possessing two (2) separate ORIGINAL BILL OFLADEN’s.
This case basically rest on who is able to prove “the one I have is original”.
At the onset, it seems that the police believed GTBank as per its petition of 2013. It was probably at this point that the EFCC got involved. But it is instructive that the police did not charge Mr.Innocent until 2015. A charge it withdrew in Feb 2016. Innoson in the meanwhile, had made several attempts since 2014 to stop the IGP investigation.But in Sept 2017, the Court of Appeal, dismissed the motion for being unmeritorious and ordered that proceeding in the criminal case (of forgery)against Innoson should proceed.
What we now know is that on October 12, 2017,the Police through its Charge No. FHC/L/565C/2015 (now handled by the DPP)filed an application for the issuance of bench warrant against Innocent Chukwuma and others. This was adjourned to the 8th Dec 2017. It is possible that the recent arrest by the EFCC is linked with this development.
One thing is clear, though, this case is not going away, and Mr Innocent Chukwuma will still need to clear his name in court against this forgery charge. Let me say a few words on the claims of both parties. If you analyze both claims, one would be able to make the following deductions.
1. There was a loan.Whether it is N2.4 Billion or N1.3 Billion is a different issue.
2. For Innoson to import, GTB must have opened LC in favour of Innoson. There is no way Innoson could have cleared the goods without duty payment which follows after assessment notice after Risk Assessment Report (RAR) has been issued. To get the RAR, you need the Original BoL
Question is – “Did GTBank process the RAR?
One thing is clear here, There is more to this story than meets the eye. At best, it looks like a bad case of disagreement over indebtedness, with each side trying to gain leverage. At worst, it may reveal a case of conspiracy by the importer, bank, and customs to defraud the FGN.
Conclusion
I know we love drama and nothing can trump the drama of an arrest in the residence of a popular industrialist in the midst of his employees. But the facts of this case are bigger, judging from the time frame as detailed in this article.
While we can say absolutely that GTBank is not directly involved in his arrest, we can infer however is that the banks’s petition appears to be the basis upon which Mr. Innocent Chukwuma is currently being investigated. Thus, the bank is somewhat connected to it, indirectly if not directly.
If the evidence of Innoson’s numerous court cases is anything to go by, I am convinced that he will win this, too. Meanwhile taking a position either way. I hope this article has helped towards achieving that.
For additional readings and updates, read this article – Innoson Group Vs GTBank : 30 Key Points you need to know about their dispute from Proshare which sheds more light on the issue; as well as related references below this contribution. Thank you..
