Otedola and Obaigbena
There is no respite yet for General Hydrocarbons Limited (GHL) as a Federal High Court sitting in Lagos has reserved till a later date its ruling on a move by GHL seeking to vacate the order freezing its assets, accounts and related entities.
Political Economist NG reports that the order was made at the instance of First Bank of Nigeria which sought to recover a loan of $225.8 million extended to the oil company.
Through its counsel, Victor Ogude SAN, First Bank opposed the move and asked Justice Deinde Dipeolu to uphold his order freezing the assets, pending the outcome of a substantive suit aimed at recovering a loan of $225.8 million extended to the oil company.
The bank made the application Friday while responding to an application filed by GHL seeking to lift the order, which it contended was obtained through the concealment of important facts.
Political Economist NG recalls that both First Bank and GHL have been engaged in media brickbats over the loan with their legal teams making claims and counter-claims on the validity or otherwise of the disputed loan.
On December 30, 2024, Justice Deinde Dipeolu had granted an ex-parte order restricting all commercial banks from releasing or dealing with any assets or monies belonging to General Hydrocarbons Limited, its agents, subsidiaries, or sister companies up to the amount claimed by the plaintiffs.
The judge had also restrained Nduka Obaigbena, Efe Damilola Obaigbena, and Olabisi Eka Obaigbena—directors of General Hydrocarbons Limited—from transferring or dissipating any of their assets located in Nigeria, whether movable or immovable until the court decides on the Motion on Notice for an interlocutory injunction.
Other respondents in the suit include GHL 121 Ltd, Aimonte Nigeria Limited, Calidin Global Resources Limited, CESL Oyo Production BBC Limited (owner of FPSO Tamara Tokoni), CESL Oyo Production O&M Limited, and VITOL SA.
The others are Mercuria Energy Trading SA, Trafigura PTE Limited, Glencore Energy UK Limited, Schlumberger Nigeria Limited, Schlumberger Overseas SA, and Baker Hughes Oilfield Services.
GHL’s counsel, Abiodun Layonu SAN, while arguing for the lifting of the order, claimed that First Bank’s suit represents an abuse of court process.
Layonu claimed that the bank failed to disclose an earlier order granted by Justice Ambrose Lewis-Allagoa which restrained the bank from taking further action to recover the loan until the parties subjected themselves to arbitration.
He therefore asked the court to dismiss the Mareva Injunction, arguing that the court was misled into granting it and same has caused significant financial harm to GHL.
In his response, Ogude averred that First Bank did not deceive the court to obtain the order, adding that the bank provided all relevant facts in its affidavit supporting the suit.
He also pointed out that the parties involved in Justice Lewis-Allagoa’s case and those before Justice Dipeolu are different and that nothing in the earlier order prevents First Bank from pursuing the current matter under different agreements.
Ogide noted that no law restricts their constitutional right to seek judicial redress for disputes, and further asked the court to dismiss GHL’s suit as incompetent and set a date for the hearing of the substantive suit.
However, after considering the arguments presented, the judge reserved the ruling for a later date, which the court shall communicate to both parties.
