•Justice Dipeolu: Based on all my findings above, I hold that the 1st Defendant/Applicant Motion on Notice (GHL) dated January 13, 2025 succeeds, the Mareva Order of 30th December, 2024 is hereby set aside.
•Therefore, the 2nd to 5th Defendants/Applicants’ alternative relief succeeds to the extent that the Mareva Order of 30th December, 2024 is set aside…
Wale Igbintade
In a landmark victory for General Hydrocarbons Limited (GHL), the Federal High Court in Lagos, yesterday, set aside an order of Mareva injunction freezing the assets of the oil and gas company and that of its directors in a suit with First Bank Holdings Plc.
The lawsuit was in connection with a disputed $225.8 million.
The court, while upholding the arguments of GHL’s counsel, Abiodun Layonu, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), as well as the arguments of Olumide Aju, SAN representing the 2nd to 5th defendants in the case held that the injunction violated an existing order from a court of concurrent jurisdiction.
Challenging the Mareva injunction, Layonu argued that it represented an abuse of court process, claiming that First Bank failed to disclose the previous order by Justice Lewis-Allagoa, which had restrained the bank from further action.
Layonu contended that the Mareva order had caused significant financial harm to GHL.
The earlier order, issued on December 12, 2024, had restrained the bank from taking further action to recover the loan until arbitration proceedings between the parties had been concluded.
The case concerns a loan dispute between First Bank of Nigeria Limited, a subsidiary of First Bank Holdings and GHL, along with several other related entities, including GHL 121 Ltd, Aimonte Nigeria Limited, and Schlumberger Nigeria Limited.
The injunction had restricted all commercial banks from dealing with assets or funds belonging to GHL and its affiliates.
First Bank had approached the court via an ex-parte application against GHL and 15 other entities even when there was a subsisting judgement.
Responding to the suit, GHL and some of the defendants urged the court to discharge the order freezing its assets and accounts on the grounds that the court was misled in granting same.
The oil firm argued that the order was obtained through fraudulent misrepresentation and concealment of material facts.
GHL and other applicants accused First Bank of misleading the court to obtain orders against them.
They argued that had all the facts been presented before the trial judge, the order against them would not have been granted.
The trial judge upheld GHL’s arguments and consequently set aside the freezing order.
In his ruling, Justice Dehinde Dipeolu, stated that when compared with an earlier order issued by Justice Ambrose Lewis-Allagoa in Suit No. 1953, the Mareva Injunction should be set aside.
The court found that First Bank of Nigeria and FBNQUEST Limited, at whose instance the order was procured, failed to fully disclose Justice Lewis-Allagoa’s order, which made the Mareva Injunction incompatible with the earlier ruling.
The court consequently agreed with GHL and the 2nd to 5th defendants that First Bank deliberately “suppressed facts” to mislead the court into granting the order against GHL.
The court in the circumstance, said it had no choice but to set aside the order freezing GHL accounts as well as the accounts of all the other defendants in the case.
Justice Dipeolu stated, “I have carefully read through all that is contained in the Originating Summons in Suit No:FHC/L/CS/1953/24 and the Interim Orders of Hon. Justice Allagoa J. dated the 12th of December, 2024. It appears to me that the Interim Orders made by Hon. Justice Allagoa J. revolves around the arbitration proceedings between the 1st Defendant and the 1st Plaintiff in this case, which arbitration proceedings is pursuant to Clause 12 (c) of the Agreement between the 1st Defendant and the 1st Plaintiff dated the 29th of May, 2021. This position is reflected in all the Interim Orders granted on 12th of December, 2024.
“Although, the Interim Orders made by this Court on the 30th of December, 2024 are in relation to the subsequent facilities agreement between the 1st Plaintiff and the 1st Defendant and it does not extend to the receivables in the agreement of 29 of May, 2021, also, the present suit on the face of it if placed side by side with FHC/L/CS/1953/2024 is not an abuse of process for the reasons given above, however, in view of the Orders of Allagoa J. made on the 12th of December, 2024, the Mareva order granted by this Court on 30th December, is hereby set aside.
“Based on all my findings above, I hold that the 1st Defendant/Applicant Motion on Notice dated January 13, 2025 succeeds, the Mareva Order of 30th December, 2024 is hereby set aside.
Therefore, the 2nd to 5th Defendants/Applicants’ alternative relief succeeds to the extent that the Mareva Order of 30th December, 2024 is set aside against 2nd – 5th Defendants.”
Justice Dipeolu adjourned the case till February 19, 2025, for further proceedings.
Unfortunately, attempts are already being made on social media to falsify the ruling and mislead the public by bringing documents about orders that have now been vacated by the court. The court clearly and unambiguously vacated the entire Mareva contrary to what is being circulated out there by the bank. The court did not vacate the Mareva order piecemeal but the entire injunctive orders obtained by the bank.
Meanwhile, GHL directors who were also negatively affected by the ex parte freezing order have begun proceedings worldwide against First Bank, seeking $1 billion each in damages for defamation and wrongful freezing of their accounts.
GHL is also bringing a case in the Legal Practitioners Privileges Committee against First Bank lawyers, Babajide Koku, SAN and Victor Ogude SAN for unprofessional conduct.
