Follow Us on Google
By Lukman Olabiyi
The Zamfara State High Court sitting in Gusau has ordered the freezing of N1.45 billion allegedly belonging to Ronchess Group Plc in a contract dispute over consultancy fees linked to multi-billion-naira road projects awarded by the state government.
Justice Mukhtar Yushau issued the interlocutory injunction in Suit No. ZMS/GS/3/2025, restraining a bank from releasing, transferring or tampering with the funds pending the determination of the substantive suit filed by Samson Davies and Signature Group Limited.
The plaintiffs are seeking enforcement of what they described as a 20 per cent consultancy agreement allegedly entered into with Ronchess Group Plc and its Chairman, Jackson Ukuevo, over contracts secured from the Zamfara State Government.
In the ruling delivered on Motion No. ZMS/GS/M/472/2025, the court directed the bank, its agents and officers not to deal with the disputed sum of N1,450,287,277.96 pending the conclusion of the case.
Justice Yushau also restrained Ronchess Group Plc, Ukuevo and their affiliates, directors, shareholders and agents from dissipating or transferring the funds in dispute.
The court, however, clarified that the order only affects the disputed amount and does not extend to other funds belonging to the defendants.
The judge further ordered the defendants to restore any money allegedly transferred from the disputed funds to affiliated companies during the pendency of the suit.
According to court documents, the plaintiffs claimed that Signature Group Limited was engaged in 2023 to facilitate the award of road construction contracts for Ronchess in exchange for 20 per cent of the total contract value.
In an affidavit before the court, Samson Davies, Managing Director of Signature Group Limited, alleged that he facilitated meetings between Ukuevo and Zamfara State Governor, Dauda Lawal, which eventually led to the award of the contracts.
Davies stated that the first phase of the road project, valued at N4.15 billion, was awarded on 26 July 2023, while a second phase worth N13.94 billion was awarded on 29 November 2023.
He further claimed that after receiving mobilisation payments from the state government, Ronchess paid N200 million and later N94.8 million to Signature Group Limited as part-payment of the agreed commission.
The plaintiffs alleged that despite subsequent payments amounting to over N7.25 billion allegedly received by Ronchess, no further commission was paid, leaving an outstanding balance of N1.45 billion.
Davies also accused the company of moving project funds into accounts belonging to affiliated firms, including Ronchess Infrastructure Management Company Ltd, Ronchess Global Resources Plc and Deltaforte Network Ltd.
He argued that unless the funds were preserved by the court, the plaintiffs risked obtaining a worthless judgment.
However, the defendants denied the claims and described the suit as misleading and baseless.
In a counter-affidavit filed by Ronchess Contract Manager, James Ibrahim Mamza, the company denied engaging Davies as a contract facilitator or agreeing to pay a 20 per cent commission.
Ronchess maintained that Davies was merely employed as a management consultant and was initially paid annual consultancy fees before being placed on a monthly salary of N10 million in 2022.
The company further claimed that payments made to Signature Group Limited were meant for foreign exchange transactions to procure construction materials abroad, alleging that Davies failed to remit the full sums to suppliers.
Ronchess disclosed that it had petitioned the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission over alleged financial misconduct involving Davies.
According to the defendants, the petition resulted in the arraignment of Samson Abayomi Davies and another person in Charge No. ID/2605162025 titled: Federal Republic of Nigeria v. Samson Abayomi Davies & Anor.
The company also accused Davies of unlawfully accessing confidential banking information through a former account officer of Zenith Bank after his disengagement in November 2023.
Ronchess argued that granting the preservatory order could disrupt ongoing public infrastructure projects in Zamfara State.
Despite the objections, the court granted the injunction and ordered that the disputed funds be preserved pending the hearing and determination of the substantive suit.
