Hot Source•Awards N1m cost against two defendants
Wale Igbintade
Justice S.B. Belgore of the Federal Capital Territory (FCT) High Court, Abuja, has nullified arbitration proceedings initiated at the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC), London, against indigenous energy firm, Aiteo Eastern E&P Company Limited, declaring the actions a violation of subsisting court orders.
The arbitration, which concerned the financing arrangements for Oil Mining Lease (OML) 29, estimated at over $2 billion, was set aside in its entirety for proceeding in defiance of injunctive orders issued by the court on January 21, 2021.
Delivering the ruling in Suit No. FCT/HC/CV/079/2021 on July 8, 2025, Belgore declared all steps taken in Arbitration Nos. 25880/AZR and 25881/AZR as “null, void, of no effect, and incapable of conferring any legal right or obligation” on the 1st to 16th defendants, including any award that might have resulted.
The lawsuit was filed by Tempo Energy Nigeria Limited against Aiteo and a host of other financial and corporate institutions, including Africa Finance Corporation, Ecobank Nigeria Limited, First Bank, GTBank, Fidelity Bank, and Shell entities, among others.
Other listed parties included Citibank Europe Plc (UK), Citibank N.A. (London), FBN Trustees, Zenith Trustees, and several Nigerian banks and trustees.
The court found that the arbitration was conducted despite the interim order issued in January 2021 restraining all parties from taking further steps pending the hearing of a motion for interlocutory injunction.
Belgore emphasised the parties remained bound by the interim order and reiterated the matter would proceed to hearing on September 29, 2025, subject to the outcome of any pending appeals.
In a further blow to the erring parties, the judge awarded N500,000 in costs each against the 2nd and 16th defendants – Africa Finance Corporation and Dame Elizabeth Gloster in favour of the claimant. The costs are to be paid before the next hearing.
The ruling followed an oral application by Tempo Energy’s counsel, Kehinde Ogunwumiju, SAN, who urged the court to invalidate all actions taken in breach of its orders, describing the arbitration as a direct affront to judicial authority.
Ogunwumiju referenced documents attached to the affidavit of facts – including admissions by the 1st defendant (Aiteo) that it participated in the arbitration “under protest” and informed the court that the ICC panel proceeded despite being made aware of the Nigerian court’s order.
In defence, Aiteo’s counsel argued that the company had informed the arbitral tribunal of the court’s injunction and did not consent to the process, asserting it should not be held liable for contempt.
However, the court rejected these submissions and concluded that the participation, regardless of protest, violated its injunctive powers and warranted the nullification of the entire arbitration process and outcome.
The underlying dispute had been delayed for over four years after some defendants appealed the interim orders.
The Court of Appeal, however, dismissed their appeal on April 25, 2025, labelling it “hopeless” and a “reckless abuse of court process.”
With the appeal dismissed, the High Court resumed proceedings, and the claimants promptly sought judicial redress for the arbitration conducted in defiance of its orders.
