The Supreme Court has upheld a N5 million award against United Bank for Africa (UBA) over unauthorised ATM withdrawals from customer Abdullahi Isiyaku’s savings account, finding the bank acted with “reckless disregard” for his rights.
In a judgment delivered on June 20, 2025, Justice Mohammed Baba Idris (lead) affirmed the Sokoto State High Court’s decision in Suit No. SS/69/2010, which had granted the customer a refund, an unreserved written apology and N5 million in aggravated and punitive damages. The Sokoto trial court judgment (delivered by Justice Bello Abbas on March 30, 2012) had been partly overturned by the Court of Appeal, which affirmed liability but reduced the damages to N200,000. The Supreme Court restored the full N5 million and set aside the Court of Appeal’s reduction.
The dispute began after Isiyaku deposited N955,000 and later discovered N350,000 had been withdrawn from his account via ATM transactions in Asaba, Delta State—transactions he says he did not authorise and could not have made because his ATM card remained in his possession. He testified that he had never visited Asaba or authorised anyone to use his card.
UBA denied liability, arguing the withdrawals were made using the customer’s card and correct PIN and blaming the loss on the customer’s choice of an easy PIN. At trial, Isiyaku said bank staff had assisted customers to activate cards and that he chose the PIN “1234” because it was easy to remember; he also said the bank had not warned him about the risks of a simple PIN. The bank admitted the ATM CCTV was not functional when the disputed withdrawals occurred.
The Supreme Court held the trial court’s award of aggravated and punitive damages was supported by evidence and settled legal principles. The court found UBA “gravely breached its fiduciary and contractual duties by unjustifiably and persistently denying the appellant access to his funds, thereby causing severe and prolonged hardship to him and his dependants.” It characterized the bank’s conduct as negligent, oppressive and demonstrating reckless disregard for the customer’s rights, making aggravated and punitive damages appropriate to compensate, punish and deter similar conduct. The apex court described the Court of Appeal’s substituted award of N200,000 as “grossly inadequate and unjust.”
