Wale Igbintade
Justice Deinde Dipeolu of the Federal High Court in Lagos has urged parties in a N98.5 billion patent infringement suit involving Enterprise Logistics Speciale Limited, the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN), Nigeria Inter-Bank Settlement System Plc (NIBSS), and Avanage Nigeria Limited to explore an amicable settlement before the commencement of trial.
The judge declined to open trial after noting that three of the defendants, Avanage Nigeria Limited, the CBN and the Registrar of Patents and Designs, were not represented in court.
He directed that hearing notices be served on the absent parties and encouraged all sides to engage in genuine settlement discussions.
The plaintiffs, Enterprise Logistics Speciale Limited and its Managing Director, Samuel Kolajo, are seeking about N98.5 billion in damages over the alleged infringement of their patented cash management technology, breach of a Non-Disclosure Agreement (NDA), and losses they claim resulted from the refusal to deploy their cash management solution on Nigeria’s national payment infrastructure.
At the proceedings, Tayo Oyetibo (SAN), appeared for the plaintiffs, while Olaoluwa Ale-Daniel represented NIBSS.
The CBN was not represented by counsel.
Oyetibo informed the court that the matter was scheduled for trial and that the plaintiffs’ witness was present and ready to testify.
Justice Dipeolu, however, held that it would be inappropriate to proceed in the absence of legal representation for Avanage Nigeria Limited, the CBN and the Registrar of Patents and Designs.
He ordered that hearing notices be served on the absent defendants before the next adjourned date.
The judge also reminded counsel of the provisions of the Federal High Court Act, which encourage courts to facilitate amicable resolution of disputes, and urged the parties to make sincere efforts to resolve the matter without proceeding to trial.
Responding, counsel for NIBSS argued that the payment system operator functions strictly under the regulatory oversight of the CBN and lacks the authority to take unilateral decisions.
He also maintained that NIBSS opposed any arrangement that would create a monopoly, which he said lay at the centre of the dispute.
In reply, Oyetibo argued that the plaintiffs invested substantial resources in developing their patented technologies and were entitled to the exclusive protection and commercial enjoyment of their intellectual property.
He submitted that the innovations, if deployed, would significantly improve Nigeria’s cash management system and benefit the country’s economy.
According to him, the dispute has persisted because of the “selfish interests” of certain individuals in positions of authority, adding that the economy has been deprived of the benefits of the inventions.
Despite the disagreement, Oyetibo told the court that the plaintiffs remained open to settlement negotiations.
Following the submissions, Justice Dipeolu directed the parties to engage in meaningful discussions with a view to resolving the dispute out of court. He adjourned the case until October 15 and 16, 2026, for trial if settlement efforts prove unsuccessful.
According to their amended statement of claim, the plaintiffs said they developed a range of innovative cash management technologies from 2011 to modernise Nigeria’s cash handling system and reduce the movement of physical cash within the banking sector.
The technologies include the Mobile Smart Deposit, Mobile Cash Sorting and Processing Device, PillarSalt Cash Supply Chain, Cash Recycling and Retail Cash Management Solution, and the PillarSalt Cash and Terminal Management System, all of which they say are protected by three patents issued under the Patents and Designs Act.
The plaintiffs alleged that after disclosing details of the inventions to the defendants, the CBN introduced the Guidelines for the Registration and Operation of Bank Neutral Cash Hubs (BNCH), which they claim substantially replicate their patented processes and technologies without consent or compensation.
They further alleged that the apex bank commercialised their inventions while failing to protect their intellectual property rights.
Among the reliefs sought are declarations affirming their exclusive ownership of the patented technologies, orders restraining the defendants from using the inventions without consent, and a directive compelling NIBSS to activate the PillarSalt Cash Management Solution on the Nigeria Central Switch within 30 days.
They also seek an order nullifying the CBN’s BNCH Guidelines, which they contend unlawfully replicate their patented inventions.
Their monetary claims include N500 million as general damages for alleged patent infringement, N200 million against NIBSS for the alleged breach of the 2015 Non-Disclosure Agreement, and N97.8 billion for losses allegedly arising from NIBSS’s refusal to integrate and activate the PillarSalt solution since December 2016.
In its amended statement of defence, however, NIBSS denied all allegations, insisting it neither infringed the plaintiffs’ patents nor breached the Non-Disclosure Agreement.
The payment system operator argued that it never refused to integrate the plaintiffs’ solution but opposed granting exclusive access that would prevent other operators with similar technologies from using the national payment infrastructure.
According to NIBSS, such an arrangement would amount to an unlawful restraint of trade and create a monopoly contrary to applicable regulatory guidelines.
NIBSS further maintained that integration decisions are subject to regulatory oversight and internal corporate approvals and cannot be taken unilaterally.
