An order signed by Justice Ekwo, which was obtained from the underwriting firm, stated that Guinea Insurance was the plantiff/ applicant, and the NAICOM was the defendant/ respondent.
The court granted an order in a suit that was filed by Guinea Insurance with suit No: FHC/ABJ/CS/151/2019 against NAICOM on February 6, 2019.
It read, “An order restraining the defendant, whether by itself, or assigns, successors-in-title, personal representatives, agents or privies or any other person or body of persons (however described) acting for it or at its instance or behest, from enforcing or taking any steps whatsoever, including, without limitation, writing letters, issuing directives and/or instructions to the plantiff or any other person or entity or taking out publications, or any other acts; with intent; (or, in respect of such acts having) the likelihood or potential to halt, stop, disrupt, frustrate or defeat; or in any other way whatever, undermine or negatively impact the operations and/or business of the plantiff; for any reasons whatsoever arising from, connected to, based upon or touching or concerning the compliance with the directives contained in the defendant’s letter of 28th January, 2019, pending the hearing and determination of the motion on notice.”
The case was later adjourned to 18th February, 2019 for motion on notice.
NAICOM had earlier barred Guinea Insurance Plc from underwriting new businesses.
The regulator had asked it to appoint a substantive managing director and secure appropriate reinsurance treaties.