Olusegun Ariyo
Contents
For two years, Wilben Trade Limited and its promoter, Mr Marcus Akroyd Wade, have run a negative media campaign linked to a trade finance dispute with Ecobank, pressing the line that they were right to sue Ecobank in Dubai and casting the Ecobank Group, its subsidiaries and officers in a poor light. Ecobank did not engage in this campaign and instead relied on the UAE’s well-developed judicial system to assess the allegations.On November 13, 2025, the Dubai Court of Cassation unanimously dismissed the claimants’ final appeal and ruled in Ecobank’s favour.In December 2024, the claimants filed a civil action in Dubai seeking USD 67.8m for alleged reputational harm and loss of profits, arguing that criminal proceedings in Nigeria, opened after Ecobank Nigeria reported suspected fraud, were malicious and an abuse of their rights. The dispute arose from fraudulent activities carried out by the claimants in relation to the trade in parboiled rice. As any regulated bank would, Ecobank escalated the issue to the authorities, rather than treat it as a simple commercial dispute.The Dubai Court of First Instance rejected the case on April 21, 2025, finding no misuse of rights or bad faith by Ecobank and holding that the claimants had not established the elements of liability. The Court of Appeal upheld that result in full on September 29, 2025, relying in part on the claimants’ own expert evidence. The Court of Cassation, the highest court in the UAE, reconfirmed those conclusions on November 13, 2025.Taken together, these rulings amount to a comprehensive failure for Mr Wade and Wilben’s legal challenges. The courts found the claim to be misconceived and without any legal or factual foundation.Ecobank welcomes this verdict with satisfaction and reaffirms its full confidence in the strength and fairness of the judicial system of the United Arab Emirates.
For two years, Wilben Trade Limited and its promoter, Mr Marcus Akroyd Wade, have run a negative media campaign linked to a trade finance dispute with Ecobank, pressing the line that they were right to sue Ecobank in Dubai and casting the Ecobank Group, its subsidiaries and officers in a poor light. Ecobank did not engage in this campaign and instead relied on the UAE’s well-developed judicial system to assess the allegations.
On November 13, 2025, the Dubai Court of Cassation unanimously dismissed the claimants’ final appeal and ruled in Ecobank’s favour.
In December 2024, the claimants filed a civil action in Dubai seeking USD 67.8m for alleged reputational harm and loss of profits, arguing that criminal proceedings in Nigeria, opened after Ecobank Nigeria reported suspected fraud, were malicious and an abuse of their rights. The dispute arose from fraudulent activities carried out by the claimants in relation to the trade in parboiled rice. As any regulated bank would, Ecobank escalated the issue to the authorities, rather than treat it as a simple commercial dispute.
The Dubai Court of First Instance rejected the case on April 21, 2025, finding no misuse of rights or bad faith by Ecobank and holding that the claimants had not established the elements of liability. The Court of Appeal upheld that result in full on September 29, 2025, relying in part on the claimants’ own expert evidence. The Court of Cassation, the highest court in the UAE, reconfirmed those conclusions on November 13, 2025.
Taken together, these rulings amount to a comprehensive failure for Mr Wade and Wilben’s legal challenges. The courts found the claim to be misconceived and without any legal or factual foundation.
Ecobank welcomes this verdict with satisfaction and reaffirms its full confidence in the strength and fairness of the judicial system of the United Arab Emirates.
This decision further reinforces Ecobank’s commitment to upholding the highest standards of governance, compliance, and respect for the rule of law everywhere it operates.
