The Court of Appeal in Abuja has ruled that Fidelity Bank Plc cannot be held liable for the alleged violation of the fundamental rights of Michael Kundera, reversing the decision of the Federal Capital Territory High Court.
In a judgment delivered on September 14, 2026, a three-member panel led by Justice Adebukola Banjoko held that the evidence before the trial court did not establish a sufficient connection between Fidelity Bank and Kundera’s arrest and detention.
The appellate court consequently allowed the bank’s appeal and set aside the finding of liability against it.
The dispute arose from suit No. CV/6258/23, instituted by Kundera following his arrest and detention between May 15 and 16, 2023. He had alleged that his detention was unlawful as he was neither charged before a court nor granted administrative bail.
The respondents included the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), former EFCC Chairman Abdulrasheed Bawa, an EFCC officer identified as Calistus, and Fidelity Bank Plc.
In April 2024, the FCT High Court, presided over by Justice Peter Kekemeke, had declared Kundera’s arrest and detention unlawful and held that his fundamental rights had been violated.
The court ordered the respondents, jointly or severally, to pay Kundera ₦10 million in damages, in addition to ₦2 million as costs.
The trial court had also observed that Kundera was reportedly 75 years old at the time and held that continued invitations and alleged threats against him concerning a matter said to have already been decided exceeded the lawful bounds of the respondents.
Kundera, through his counsel, O. Orji, had linked the dispute to a parcel of land at the Foreign Affairs Quarters, which he claimed belonged to him. He also maintained that the matter was pending before the Court of Appeal in suit No. CA/ABJ/CV/533/2021.
Among the reliefs sought were declarations that his arrest and detention violated Sections 35 and 36 of the 1999 Constitution, an order restraining further invitations or threats of arrest, and ₦500 million in exemplary or aggravated damages.
Fidelity Bank appealed the decision, arguing that the High Court had not been presented with credible evidence connecting it to Kundera’s arrest, detention or alleged rights violations.
The bank explained that its involvement in the matter was limited to a petition submitted to the EFCC over allegations involving legal entities that had obtained a ₦100 million loan procurement order for a specific project but allegedly diverted the funds for personal purposes.
According to the bank, Kundera was not the subject of the petition and there was no legal or evidentiary basis for attributing the subsequent actions of the EFCC to the bank.
Fidelity Bank therefore asked the Court of Appeal to determine whether the trial court was justified in granting reliefs against it without sufficient evidence establishing its involvement or liability.
The appellate panel agreed with the bank, holding that there was no credible evidence establishing that Fidelity Bank had infringed Kundera’s fundamental rights.
It further held that Kundera failed to discharge the burden of proof required to establish wrongdoing by the bank and sustain the reliefs granted against it.
The Court of Appeal consequently reversed the finding of liability against Fidelity Bank, clearing the bank of responsibility for the alleged infringement in the fundamental rights action.
Comment here