The Supreme Court of Nigeria has delivered a landmark ruling affirming the Asset Management Corporation of Nigeria’s authority to sell the Lagos Continental Hotel for N22 billion, conclusively resolving a years-long legal dispute that has significant implications for debt recovery in the country’s banking sector.
In its judgment handed down on February 20, 2026, the apex court led by a panel including Kudirat Kekere-Ekun ruled decisively in favour of AMCON, Polaris Bank Limited, and the buyer 11 Hospitality Plc. The court set aside an earlier decision by the Court of Appeal that had favoured Milan Industries Limited, the original borrower and developer of the hotel.
The saga began when Skye Bank Plc extended a substantial credit facility to Milan Industries Limited to finance the construction of the upscale Lagos Continental Hotel, a prominent luxury property located on Victoria Island, one of the city’s prime business and tourism hubs.
The facility became a non-performing loan, leading the bank to appoint Kunle Ogunba as Receiver/Manager under a registered deed of legal mortgage over the hotel as collateral. Ogunba took possession of the asset to facilitate recovery efforts.
In September 2018, AMCON acquired the Eligible Bank Asset including the loan and associated security from Polaris Bank, subsequently confirming Ogunba’s appointment as Receiver/Manager. Acting under its statutory powers and the mortgage deed, AMCON proceeded to sell the hotel to 11 Hospitality Plc for N22 billion.
Milan Industries challenged the transaction in the Federal High Court, arguing against the validity of the disposal. The trial court dismissed the suit, but on appeal, the Court of Appeal overturned the decision in favour of Milan Industries, prompting AMCON and the other parties to escalate the matter to the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court emphasized that the AMCON Act is a special-purpose legislation enacted by the National Assembly to address unique and systemic challenges in Nigeria’s financial sector, particularly the burden of non-performing loans. It called for a purposive interpretation consistent with the Act’s objectives of stabilizing the banking system and enabling efficient recovery of distressed assets.
Key aspects of the ruling include affirmation of Section 60 of the AMCON Act, which exempts the corporation from stamp duties on relevant instruments, validation of AMCON’s rights and interests as mortgagee irrespective of any issues related to upstamping of documents, and a clear holding that AMCON maintains a continuing security interest in mortgaged assets for as long as an outstanding debt remains unpaid.
The court underscored that these provisions safeguard AMCON’s mandate to dispose of acquired assets swiftly and effectively, protecting the broader economy from the ripple effects of bad debts.
Posts
