The Court of Appeal in Abuja has overturned a Federal Capital Territory High Court judgment which awarded N10 million against Fidelity Bank Plc over an alleged violation of the fundamental rights of Michael Kundera.
The appellate court, in a judgment delivered on September 14, 2026, held that there was no credible evidence establishing that the bank infringed Kundera’s constitutional rights.
A three-member panel, led by Justice Adebukola Banjoko, consequently upheld Fidelity Bank’s appeal against the decision of the lower court.
The case followed Kundera’s arrest and detention between May 15 and 16, 2023, which he alleged occurred without him being charged before a court or granted bail.
He had instituted a fundamental rights action before the FCT High Court, presided over by Justice Peter Kekemeke, and named Fidelity Bank, the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission and former EFCC Chairman, Abdulrasheed Bawa, among the parties.
The trial court subsequently found that Kundera’s rights had been violated and awarded N10 million in costs against the defendants.
Fidelity Bank, however, challenged the judgment, arguing that the evidence placed before the trial court did not establish any role by the bank in the alleged infringement.
The bank told the Court of Appeal that its petition to the EFCC related to allegations of criminal conduct involving legal entities that had obtained a N100 million loan procurement order from the bank for a particular project.
According to the bank, the funds were allegedly diverted for personal purposes by the entities involved.
It maintained that Kundera was not the subject of the petition and that there was no sufficient basis to hold the bank responsible for his subsequent arrest and detention.
The appellate court upheld the substance of the bank’s argument, finding that no credible evidence had been presented to demonstrate that Fidelity Bank violated Kundera’s fundamental rights.
The panel also held that Kundera failed to discharge the burden of proof required to establish wrongdoing by the bank capable of supporting the reliefs granted by the trial court.
Another aspect of the dispute involved a parcel of land at the Foreign Affairs Quarters, which Kundera claimed belonged to him.
The circumstances surrounding the land formed part of the issues raised in connection with his arrest and subsequent legal action.
Fidelity Bank had specifically asked the Court of Appeal to determine whether the trial judge properly exercised his discretion in granting reliefs against the bank without sufficient material evidence linking it to the alleged violation.
The appellate court’s judgment has now reversed the finding of liability against Fidelity Bank, setting aside the lower court’s decision against the bank in the fundamental rights proceedings.
Leave a Reply