The Federal High Court in Abuja has brought a definitive end to a high-stakes, five-year intellectual property battle over the naming rights of Africa’s first Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC). Justice James Omotosho dismissed a ₦90.10 billion damages suit filed by eNaira Payment Solutions Limited against the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) and the Corporate Affairs Commission (CAC), ruling that allowing a private company to monopolize the name of a sovereign currency would amount to surrendering Nigerian sovereignty.
The court granted the counterclaims filed by the CBN and the CAC, permanently restraining the private firm from parading itself as the proprietor of the “eNaira” trademark. Additionally, the judge ordered the company to strip the word “Naira” from its corporate name within six weeks or face further regulatory sanctions, awarding ₦10 million in damages against the firm to cover the apex bank’s cost of litigation.
1. The Sovereign Asset Defense Overrides Prior Registration
The legal battle dates back to September 2021, when eNaira Payment Solutions Limited attempted to block the state-backed rollout of the CBDC. The company argued that it had been incorporated since April 2004 and held registered trademarks under Class 36 (Financial Services) and Class 42 (Technology Services), making the apex bank’s digital currency a case of willful corporate name violation and trademark infringement.
However, the court upheld a crucial administrative action taken by the Ministry of Industry, Trade and Investment’s Trademark Registry on November 15, 2021. The registry had formally canceled and withdrawn its previous acceptance letters issued to the private company.
Justice Omotosho ruled that the administrative cancellation was entirely valid under Nigerian law based on two core principles:
-
National Asset Status: The “eNaira” brand is a public national asset tied directly to the sovereign legal tender of the Federal Republic of Nigeria.
-
Absence of Vested Rights: Because the initial trademark approvals were administrative errors that were legally canceled, the plaintiff lacked any superior legal title to seek a permanent injunction against the central bank.
2. Enforcing CAMA 2020 Restrictions on Misleading Names
The judgment also clarified the strict limits governing corporate naming conventions managed by the Corporate Affairs Commission. The CAC successfully argued its counterclaim using Section 852(2)(a) and (b) of the Companies and Allied Matters Act (CAMA) 2020, which bars companies from maintaining names that falsely imply government sponsorship, official patronage, or state-sanctioned exclusivity.
The court emphasized that while the company existed prior to the digital currency’s development, its stated business goal—creating and managing a private digital currency platform—deeply aggravated the situation. To an average citizen, the brand profile created a false impression that the private firm possessed the federal authority to print, issue, or manage a digital variant of the national currency.
3. Mitigating Systemic Risks to Financial Stability
Beyond strict statutory interpretations, the court anchored its decision on macroeconomic stability and investor confidence. Justice Omotosho warned that permitting a private corporate entity to issue an independent digital token using the national currency’s name would be disastrous for the domestic financial ecosystem.
| Litigation Dimension | Plaintiff’s Prayers (Dismissed) | Court Verdict / Granted Counterclaims |
| Monetary Indemnity | Demand for ₦90.10 Billion in general damages. | Denied; plaintiff ordered to pay ₦10 Million to the CBN. |
| Trademark Status | Recognition as exclusive proprietor of “eNaira”. | Canceled; declared a sovereign national asset. |
| Corporate Branding | Retention of 22-year-old registered corporate name. | Ordered to strip “Naira” from name within 6 weeks. |
| Injunctive Relief | Restraining CBN from global trade registrations. | Granted perpetual injunction against the private company. |
The court concluded that if a private company were allowed to use the sovereign currency’s identity without central bank guarantees, it would trigger massive public skepticism and destabilize the financial sector. By dismissing the company’s suit as legally flawed and fundamentally incompetent, the judgment secures the apex bank’s exclusive legal control over the country’s central bank digital currency infrastructure and broader monetary system.
