The Court of Appeal in Abuja has dismissed an application seeking to suspend the execution of a Federal High Court judgment that ordered the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) to pay Kasmal International Services N579 billion with a 10 per cent annual interest on the sum, for its role in stamp duty collection.

The appeal was filed by the School of Banking Honours against Kasmal, with the CBN and the Attorney General of the Federation (AGF) as parties.

A three-member panel of the Court of Appeal held in a unanimous judgment on Friday that the appeal lacked merit and constituted an abuse of judicial process.

The Federal High Court in Abuja had, on October 11, 2024, ordered the CBN to remit the judgment sum to Kasmal, following a lawsuit over the collection of stamp duties.

The trial judge, Justice Inyang Ekwo, who presided over the case, ruled that Kasmal was entitled to the funds based on its contractual agreement with the Nigerian Postal Service (NIPOST).

According to the court, the CBN had previously paid Kasmal N10.3 billion, representing 15 per cent of stamp duties collected from Deposit Money Banks (DMBs) between January 1, 2015, and January 31, 2020. The payment was drawn from the CBN-NIPOST Stamp Duty Collection Account No. 3000047517.

Justice Ekwo ruled that the CBN could not renege on its contractual obligations to Kasmal and NIPOST.

Kasmal?s lawyer, Alex Izinyon (SAN), argued that his client was appointed by NIPOST to oversee the collection of N50 stamp duties on receipts issued by banks and financial institutions for electronic transfers and teller deposits of N1,000 and above, in accordance with the Stamp Duties Act and the Nigeria Financial Regulations 2009.

Dissatisfied with the ruling, the CBN and the AGF filed a notice of appeal on October 24, 2024, listing 17 grounds of appeal.

Their lead counsel, Chief Akintola, contended that the Federal High Court erred in law by awarding the judgment sum to Kasmal.

The appellants argued that stamp duty revenues are public funds belonging to the Federation Account, as stipulated under Section 162 of the 1999 Constitution (as amended).

They maintained that all such revenues should be shared among the three tiers of government and not paid to a private entity.

Meanwhile, the School of Banking Honours sought an order from the Court of Appeal to suspend the enforcement of the judgement and to grant leave for an appeal.

The organisation requested an extension of time to file an appeal and sought permission to combine appeals against both the ruling and the substantive judgment.

It also asked for an order restraining the CBN from implementing the trial court?s ruling.

In response, Kasmal?s lawyer, Izinyon, filed a counter-affidavit, opposing the application for a stay of execution.

He argued that the appeal and the application for leave were redundant, stating:

?There will be too many appeals if this application is granted.?

Izinyon contended that the High Court?s judgement had become final and that the appellant did not require leave to appeal.

Delivering the lead decision of the Court of Appeal, Justice Okon Abang, upheld Izinyon?s arguments, saying that the application was incompetent and frivolous.

?It is not really clear what the applicant is asking for,? he said.

The judge said it seemed the applicant was gambling with judicial processes.

?You have filed an appeal; why ask for leave to appeal again?? he asked.

The judge described the application for stay and leave as frivolous and an abuse of court processes.

?In the instant appeal, the applicant has no valid notice of appeal and failed woefully to combine and transmit the record of appeal in this matter.

?To be modest, this application is the worst, reckless abuse of the judicial process and a complete waste of judicial time.

?It is clear that the applicant has no valid or competent appeal upon which it seeks the stay of execution of the subsisting judgment of the trial court.

?The application is hereby dismissed, and costs of N300,000 are awarded in favour of Kasmal,? the judge ruled.

He said the application was brought in bad faith and a sheer waste of valuable judicial time. (THISDAY)

Update news