1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Rating 0.00 (0 Votes)

User Rating: 0 / 5

Star InactiveStar InactiveStar InactiveStar InactiveStar Inactive
 

Justice Gabriel Kolawole of the Federal High Court Abuja has told the Federal Government and the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) not to take further step either to freeze the bank account or halt the operations of a firm, AITEO Eastern E & P Company Ltd, pending the determination of a suit filed in court.

The firm in the suit against Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice (AGF), and the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) had alleged that the Federal Government is taking steps to cripple its operation based on an unregistered judgment two litigants obtained from United Kingdom.

Justice Kolawole said it is essential to grant an order of “status quo ante bellum” after hearing an ex parte motion argued by Chief Mike Ozekhome, (SAN) who stated that the operations of AITEO Eastern E & P Company Ltd was under threat of being closed down and needed a preservative order.

The motion exparte was filed pursuant to Order 26 rule 8 of the Federal High Court Rules. Dated November 23, 2017 the motion was filed on behalf of the plaintiff (Aiteo) by Wole Olanipekun, (SAN), Chief Mike Ozekhome, (SAN), and other senior lawyers.

In a lengthy bench ruling, Justice Kolawole ordered the Federal Government to maintain the “status quo ante bellum”, pending the determination of the motion on notice dated 23rd November, 2017, filed by the plaintiff against the defendants.

The court further ordered the AGF and EFCC to appear in court on December 18, to show cause why the reliefs sought by the plaintiff in the motion ex parte shall not be granted.

Kolawole directed the defendants to do this by way of affidavit depositions, within seven days of being served with the court processes filed by the Plaintiff.

The court also fixed December 18, for the hearing of the plaintiff’s motion on notice dated November 23, 2017.

Justice Kolawole in making the order termed “hybrid preservative order” agreed with the submissions of Ozekhome that the business operations of the plaintiff may be crippled if the ex parte restraint order made by the Crown Court, London on October 19, 2017 is allowed to be registered in Nigeria, before determination of the motion on notice:

”The facts of the instant case by my assessment presents a peculiar circumstance which this court needs to address. One of the facts is that by the Nigerian law, that is Foreign Judgement Fiscal Act, interim expropriating orders such as it is alleged to have been made by the Crown Court in London are not registrable for the enforcement in Nigeria”, Kolawole held.

AITEO, a major player in the upstream sector of the Nigerian oil industry, as well as the joint/operator of oil mining lease (OML) 29, an asset which is jointly owned by it and the Federal Government, through the NNPC, which subscribes to 55% of the said asset.

The ex parte application had sought “an order of interim injunction restraining the defendants jointly or severally, either by themselves, agents, operatives, privies, servants, aides or through any persons howsoever from interfering with or obstructing the business operations, activities and undertakings of the plaintiff, either by way of embargoing or freezing any of its accounts or obstructing it’s activities in any way or manner whatsoever.

It also prayed for “An order of interim injunction restraining the defendants jointly or severally, either by themselves, agents, operatives, privies, servants, aides or through any persons howsoever from relying on, activating, making use of, registering and or applying/enforcing the ex parte restraint order dated 19 October, 2017, made in suit Nos: 82/17, in the Matter of Benedict Peters (alleged offender) and Nnenna Peters and 5 others (third parties) etc, by the Crown Court, sitting at Southwark, United Kingdom, coram, His Honour Judge Beddoe, to disrupt, distract, frustrate, meddle (with), hinder, impede the business operations, undertakings, negotiations and activities of the plaintiff.

Arguing the ex parte motion earlier, Ozekhome, citing authorities, had urged the court to make a preservative order for maintenance of the “status quo ante bellum” in order to halt the defendants from taking any steps prejudicial to the the business concerns and activities of Aiteo.

A 20-paragraph affidavit in support of motion swore to by one Andrew Onyearu, a Director in AITEO stated that the registration and enforcement in Nigeria of the ex parte restraint order dated October 19, 2017, will deny the plaintiff of its proprietary rights in properties and assets legitimately acquired by it in Nigeria without infringing on any Nigerian law and frustrate its commitment to third parties with respect to onshore and offshore obligations.

The deponent averred that judgments and orders of foreign courts have to be first registered in Nigeria before they can be enforced, and that

Justice Gabriel Kolawole of the Federal High Court Abuja has told the Federal Government and the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) not to take further step either to freeze the bank account or halt the operations of a firm, AITEO Eastern E & P Company Ltd, pending the determination of a suit filed in court.

The firm in the suit against Attorney General of the Federation and Minister of Justice (AGF), and the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC) had alleged that the Federal Government is taking steps to cripple its operation based on an unregistered judgment two litigants obtained from United Kingdom.

Justice Kolawole said it is essential to grant an order of “status quo ante bellum” after hearing an ex parte motion argued by Chief Mike Ozekhome, (SAN) who stated that the operations of AITEO Eastern E & P Company Ltd was under threat of being closed down and needed a preservative order.

The motion exparte was filed pursuant to Order 26 rule 8 of the Federal High Court Rules. Dated November 23, 2017 the motion was filed on behalf of the plaintiff (Aiteo) by Wole Olanipekun, (SAN), Chief Mike Ozekhome, (SAN), and other senior lawyers.

In a lengthy bench ruling, Justice Kolawole ordered the Federal Government to maintain the “status quo ante bellum”, pending the determination of the motion on notice dated 23rd November, 2017, filed by the plaintiff against the defendants.

The court further ordered the AGF and EFCC to appear in court on December 18, to show cause why the reliefs sought by the plaintiff in the motion ex parte shall not be granted.

Kolawole directed the defendants to do this by way of affidavit depositions, within seven days of being served with the court processes filed by the Plaintiff.

The court also fixed December 18, for the hearing of the plaintiff’s motion on notice dated November 23, 2017.

Justice Kolawole in making the order termed “hybrid preservative order” agreed with the submissions of Ozekhome that the business operations of the plaintiff may be crippled if the ex parte restraint order made by the Crown Court, London on October 19, 2017 is allowed to be registered in Nigeria, before determination of the motion on notice:

”The facts of the instant case by my assessment presents a peculiar circumstance which this court needs to address. One of the facts is that by the Nigerian law, that is Foreign Judgement Fiscal Act, interim expropriating orders such as it is alleged to have been made by the Crown Court in London are not registrable for the enforcement in Nigeria”, Kolawole held.

AITEO, a major player in the upstream sector of the Nigerian oil industry, as well as the joint/operator of oil mining lease (OML) 29, an asset which is jointly owned by it and the Federal Government, through the NNPC, which subscribes to 55% of the said asset.

The ex parte application had sought “an order of interim injunction restraining the defendants jointly or severally, either by themselves, agents, operatives, privies, servants, aides or through any persons howsoever from interfering with or obstructing the business operations, activities and undertakings of the plaintiff, either by way of embargoing or freezing any of its accounts or obstructing it’s activities in any way or manner whatsoever.

It also prayed for “An order of interim injunction restraining the defendants jointly or severally, either by themselves, agents, operatives, privies, servants, aides or through any persons howsoever from relying on, activating, making use of, registering and or applying/enforcing the ex parte restraint order dated 19 October, 2017, made in suit Nos: 82/17, in the Matter of Benedict Peters (alleged offender) and Nnenna Peters and 5 others (third parties) etc, by the Crown Court, sitting at Southwark, United Kingdom, coram, His Honour Judge Beddoe, to disrupt, distract, frustrate, meddle (with), hinder, impede the business operations, undertakings, negotiations and activities of the plaintiff.

Arguing the ex parte motion earlier, Ozekhome, citing authorities, had urged the court to make a preservative order for maintenance of the “status quo ante bellum” in order to halt the defendants from taking any steps prejudicial to the the business concerns and activities of Aiteo.

A 20-paragraph affidavit in support of motion swore to by one Andrew Onyearu, a Director in AITEO stated that the registration and enforcement in Nigeria of the ex parte restraint order dated October 19, 2017, will deny the plaintiff of its proprietary rights in properties and assets legitimately acquired by it in Nigeria without infringing on any Nigerian law and frustrate its commitment to third parties with respect to onshore and offshore obligations.

The deponent averred that judgments and orders of foreign courts have to be first registered in Nigeria before they can be enforced, and that

Read more


0.0/5 from 0 ratings.
Summary rating

Be first people review it.

More to share? (Optional)

..%
No description
  • Size:
  • Type:
  • Preview:
© 2081 Tweeterest Digital !