Michael J. Prest has landed a significant courtroom win in Zambia after the High Court of Zambia threw out two attempts by the Bank of Zambia to shut down his challenge over the collapse of Investrust Bank Plc.
- Michael J. Prest has secured a major victory in the High Court of Zambia after judges rejected two attempts by the Bank of Zambia to stop his legal challenge over the liquidation of Investrust Bank Plc.
- Prest’s investment vehicle bought a 24.8% stake in the bank through the Lusaka Securities Exchange but was later told the regulator did not recognise the shares.
- The bank was placed into liquidation months later, effectively erasing the investment without compensation.
- The case has drawn international scrutiny as investors question regulatory certainty and fairness in Zambia’s financial sector.
Prest, a Nigerian investor known for high-stakes regional deals, is fighting to recover the value of a 24.8% stake that he says was effectively wiped out when the bank was pushed into liquidation.
A stalled investment that turned into a courtroom battle
Prest’s investment vehicle, Bank of Nevis International Limited, bought nearly a quarter of Investrust’s shares in 2021 through the Lusaka Securities Exchange. The purchase followed all exchange rules and went through licensed brokers.
But because Investrust was a regulated bank, the stake needed formal recognition from the central bank. BONI filed the paperwork and then waited. For almost three years, the investment sat in limbo. BONI couldn’t vote, join the board, or influence the bank’s direction. Yet it carried the full economic risk of ownership.
The situation escalated in January 2024 when regulators informed BONI that it did not recognise the company as a shareholder. Months later, Investrust was liquidated, wiping out BONI’s investment entirely and without refund.
High Court shuts down central bank challenges
In two separate rulings, Justice Charles Zulu dismissed the central bank’s attempts to block BONI’s case.
First, he rejected BoZ’s move to set aside BONI’s earlier notice of discontinuance, finding the company followed proper Zambian procedures. Second, he dismissed the claim that BONI’s fresh judicial review was an abuse of process, clearing the way for the case to proceed and ordering costs against the regulator.
The decisions keep BONI’s challenge alive, and turn the spotlight back on the country’s handling of investor rights and regulatory transparency.
Global eyes
International lawyer Robert Amsterdam of Amsterdam & Partners, who is connected to investor interests in the case, said the fallout reaches far beyond a single bank.
In a televised interview, he called the liquidation: “a tragic story and an own goal for Zambia.”
Amsterdam argued that Prest had viewed Zambia as a strategic economic gateway: “He was held up for over three years only to be left at the altar, with the Bank of Zambia putting the bank into liquidation. It is a tragic story and an own goal for Zambia.”
He warned that regulatory unpredictability is toxic to investors: “The one thing no investor can stomach is when predictability leads to uncertainty. And that’s exactly what happened in this case.”
On potential compensation, he said: “A return on investment payment for damages in the neighbourhood of $40 million would cover both the investment and the opportunity cost to the investor in this situation.”
And he predicted the case will continue to reverberate: “This is not a case that will go away. It will matter to all of the banks and investors in the future Zambian market.”
Prest’s fight is now being viewed as a test of whether investors in Zambia can rely on clear rules, transparent regulation and predictable outcomes, fundamentals that shape where capital flows.
