Redhook Media Sues CIG Motors Over ₦328.95m Advertising Debt as Court Reserves Ruling on Mareva Injunction
Redhook Media & Communications Limited has dragged CIG Motors Company Limited before the Lagos State High Court, Igbosere, over an alleged outstanding debt of N328.95 million arising from an advertising agreement between both companies.
Justice Sherifat Sonaike on Tuesday reserved ruling until August 6, 2026, on an application filed by CIG Motors seeking to discharge or modify an interim Mareva injunction that placed restrictions on its bank accounts over the disputed sum.
The injunction was granted following an application by Redhook, which asked the court to preserve CIG Motors’ assets pending arbitration proceedings connected to the advertising contract.
According to court documents, Redhook entered into a one-year advertising agreement with CIG Motors on April 1, 2025, valued at N563.73 million. The contract involved advertising CIG Motors and its LAGRIDE business on 400 dual-face lampposts across Lagos State.
Redhook told the court that it fulfilled its contractual obligations by installing and maintaining the advertisements, obtaining necessary permits, and submitting monthly performance reports. However, the company alleged that CIG Motors only paid for the printing and fabrication of advertising materials and the first instalment, leaving an outstanding balance of N328.95 million.
The claimant alleged that repeated demands and assurances from CIG Motors to settle the balance failed to yield payment, prompting it to begin arbitration proceedings and seek a Mareva injunction to prevent possible disposal of assets before the dispute is resolved.
During Tuesday’s proceedings, Redhook’s counsel, Mutiu Akinrinmade, urged the court not to prioritise CIG Motors’ application to lift the injunction, arguing that other pending applications by his client should be determined first.
Akinrinmade informed the court that Redhook had filed a preliminary objection challenging the validity of CIG Motors’ application and had also initiated contempt proceedings against Union Bank and Providus Bank.
He argued that the contempt proceedings should be addressed before other matters because they involved issues relating to the authority and dignity of the court.
The lawyer also argued that CIG Motors’ application was not ready for hearing due to new information contained in affidavits filed by some respondent banks, which required further responses from Redhook.
Responding to claims that Redhook concealed important information when obtaining the interim order, Akinrinmade maintained that his client did not hide any material facts from the court.
He argued that Redhook was neither a director nor an insider of CIG Motors and therefore could not have had access to the company’s internal financial information.
The claimant’s counsel further alleged that affidavits from Union Bank, Providus Bank, and Access Bank contradicted claims by CIG Motors regarding funds available in its accounts.
According to him, while CIG Motors claimed to have substantial balances, the banks’ affidavits indicated that the company had significant financial obligations.
However, Akinrinmade said Redhook was open to a variation of the Mareva injunction if CIG Motors provided adequate security for the disputed amount.
He stated that Redhook had previously indicated that it would not object to limiting the injunction to an account containing sufficient funds to cover the alleged debt.
He raised concerns, however, that the account reportedly holding about N330 million was with FSDH Merchant Bank, which was not a party to the proceedings, warning that enforcement of any future arbitration award could become difficult without appropriate court orders.
“If that concern is taken care of, we do not have a problem,” Akinrinmade told the court, adding that Redhook would support releasing other accounts once sufficient security was provided.
Counsel to CIG Motors, Moyosore Onigbanjo (SAN), urged the court to completely discharge the Mareva injunction, describing it as an extraordinary remedy that should only be granted where there is evidence that a defendant is attempting to hide assets or avoid enforcement of a judgment.
Onigbanjo argued that Redhook had not provided evidence that CIG Motors was disposing of assets or planning to leave Nigeria.
He told the court that CIG Motors operates the LAGRIDE e-hailing platform, runs a vehicle assembly plant in Lagos, maintains offices in Lagos and Abuja, and employs about 465 workers.
The Senior Advocate argued that freezing all of the company’s accounts had disrupted its operations, affecting its ability to pay salaries and meet statutory obligations.
He relied on an affidavit from FSDH Merchant Bank, which he said showed that CIG Motors had approximately N330 million in an account with the bank — an amount sufficient to cover the disputed debt.
Onigbanjo urged the court to, at minimum, restrict the injunction to that account rather than maintaining a freeze on all of CIG Motors’ bank accounts.
During the proceedings, Justice Sonaike observed that the purpose of a Mareva injunction was not necessarily to block access to all of a defendant’s accounts where sufficient funds existed to cover the amount in dispute.
After hearing arguments from both parties, the judge adjourned the matter until August 6, 2026, for ruling on the pending applications.
