Try asking the following...
JUDGEMENT
This appeal arose out of an application made by the Applicant/Respondent/Respondent hereafter referred to as the Respondent against the Respondent/Applicant/Appellant hereafter referred to as the Appellant for the disbursement of money under a credit facility with the Appellant Bank.
The Respondent secured a medium-Term loan of USD1,180,899.95 from the Appellant Bank for the completion of a spinning factory, interior design and purchase of auxiliary equipment. The term of the loan was 60 months.
There was also a revolving short-term loan of USD333,251.57 granted to augment the working capital of the Respondent company. This was for a 12month duration.
The goal of the Respondent Company in securing the loans was that it was part of the then flagship programme of the government namely the One District One Factory (1D1F) Programme and it required the loan to meet the conditions of the government’s industrialization policy under the programme.
The Respondent Company however, faced challenges when its two (2) directors whose joint signatures were required to enable the Appellant Bank to disburse the loan amount fell out. RAMEZ FOUAD HAMEDEH, one of the directors, reported the other director to the Police over their differences. The said director, a Dutch, jumped bail and refused to sign any disbursement requests until the police case was dropped. RAMEZ FOUAD HAMEDEH however, refused.
The Appellant Bank refused to disburse the money without the signature of the other Director based on the provisions of the facility agreement and banking rules.
As the continuation of the project was being delayed by the impasse, the Respondent company applied to the trial Court for an order to compel the Appellant Bank to disburse the funds upon the sole signature of the director in the country namely Ramez Fouad Hamedeh. The application was granted on 9th July 2020.
The Appellant Bank, after some disbursements in compliance with the order of 9th July 2020, brought an application to set aside the said order as void on the ground that the proceedings by which it was obtained was initiated by a wrong mode. This application was refused resulting in the instant appeal.
The ruling in question dated 9th July, 2020 and found at pages 41-42 of the Record of Appeal is as follows:
By Court:
The refusal of the Dutch Director Mr. Gerald M. Tunermas to approve further disbursement of the credit facility is unreasonable intended to stall the applicant's project and