Court of Appeal Lagos Quashes Conviction, Acquits Businessman Hilary Ogbobe Over Failed Commercial Transaction
The Court of Appeal, Lagos Division, has overturned the conviction of businessman Hilary Ogbobe, setting aside both his sentences and ancillary orders for obtaining money by false pretence and stealing. The appellate court held that the prosecution failed to discharge the burden of proof beyond reasonable doubt, as required in criminal proceedings.
In a unanimous judgment delivered on 27 November 2025, Justice Joseph Ekanem (with Justices Paul Bassi and Polycarp Kwahar concurring) allowed Ogbobe’s appeal against the decision of the Lagos State High Court, Ikeja, delivered on 2 May 2023 by Justice Morenike Dada.
At trial, Ogbobe had been convicted under the Advance Fee Fraud and Other Fraud Related Offences Act and the Criminal Law of Lagos State, receiving concurrent sentences of seven and three years’ imprisonment. The High Court also ordered the winding up of the third accused company, forfeiture of assets, and financial penalties.
On appeal, Ogbobe argued that the matter was contractual in nature and lacked evidence of fraudulent intent. Delivering the lead judgment, Justice Ekanem emphasised that the burden of proof in criminal trials rests solely on the prosecution and never shifts to the accused. He faulted the trial court for requiring Ogbobe to prove the existence of the dredger at the centre of the transaction.
The appellate court noted that the prosecution failed to investigate or rebut Ogbobe’s extra‑judicial statement that the dredger was located at a named yard in Satellite Town, Lagos. Despite photographic evidence and defence testimony, the prosecution neither visited the site nor invited the appellant to identify the dredger. Justice Ekanem stressed that any defence raised, however weak, must be investigated, and failure to do so is fatal to the case.
On the charge of false pretence, the court held that the prosecution did not establish falsity or fraudulent intent. It further clarified that inability to repay money within an agreed timeline amounts to a failed commercial transaction, not a criminal offence. Similarly, on the charge of stealing, the court found no evidence of dishonesty or intent to permanently deprive, noting that the complainant had consented to the use of funds for business purposes.
The appellate court also struck out the prosecution’s preliminary objection as abandoned and declared the ancillary orders of forfeiture, winding up, and fines unsustainable, describing them as an abuse of judicial power.
In conclusion, the Court of Appeal resolved all issues in favour of Ogbobe, set aside the lower court’s judgment, and entered a verdict of not guilty. He was accordingly discharged and acquitted. Justice Bassi, in concurrence, affirmed that the decision reflected the unanimous view of the panel.
