• en
ON NOW

Citing Suppression of Facts by First Bank, General Hydrocarbons Asks Court to Lift Freezing Order

Justice Dipeolu reserved ruling till a later date after General Hydrocarbons Limited sought to overturn a Federal High Court order freezing its assets in a $225m dispute with First Bank.

General Hydrocarbons Limited (GHL) has urged the Federal High Court in Lagos to discharge the order freezing its assets and accounts on the grounds that the court was misled in granting the same.

On Friday, the oil firm argued that the order was obtained through fraudulent misrepresentation of facts 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. 

They contended that the order was obtained through fraudulent misrepresentation and concealment of material facts at the time the order was obtained.

Justice Dipeolu had, on December 30, 2024, 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, and its shareholders up to the amount claimed by the plaintiffs.

The judge had also issued an order of  Mareva against the bank accounts of Nduka Obaigbena, Efe Damilola Obaigbena, and Olabisi Eka Obaigbena—directors of General Hydrocarbons Limited.

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. 

Other respondents are Mercuria Energy Trading SA, Trafigura PTE Limited, Glencore Energy UK Limited, Schlumberger Nigeria Limited, Schlumberger Overseas SA, and Baker Hughes Oilfield Services.

While arguing for the lifting of the order, GHL’s attorney, Abiodun Layonu, SAN, claimed that the bank’s suit represents an abuse of the court process. 

He also claimed that the bank had failed to disclose an earlier order granted by Justice Ambrose Lewis-Allagoa that restrained the bank from taking further action to recover the loan until the parties subjected themselves to arbitration. 

Layonu urged the court to dismiss the Mareva Injunction, arguing that the court was misled into granting it and that it has caused significant financial harm to GHL.

Similarly, Mr. Olumide Aju, SAN representing the 2nd to 5th defendants in the matter also prayed the court to dismiss the entire suit on grounds that constitutes a gross abuse of court process or in the alternative, to discharge the Mareva orders because it was obtained without full and frank disclosure of the fact that there is an ongoing Arbitration between  FBN and GHL in respect of the alleged indebtedness of GHL to FBN and that the same Federal High court had earlier restrained FBN from filing any action or commencing any enforcement proceedings against GHL pending the outcome of that Arbitration irrespective of the restyling and addition of new parties to this new suit.  

Mr. Aju argued that FBN and its counsel failed to disclose the existence of this order when they sought and obtained the Mareva order on an exparte basis. And that the court would not have granted the order if FBN had informed the court and exhibited Allagoa J’s restraining order against FBN when they sought the Mareva orders. He further argued that apart from a mere allegation that funds of GHL were being diverted there is no evidence presented by FBN to show any diversion of funds before sweeping Mareva orders were made against the assets of the 2nd to 4th defendants who are shareholders and directors of the company and who did not execute any personal guarantees in respect of the of the said loan.

In response,  Mr. Victor Ogude, SAN, from the law firm of Babajide Koku asserted that First Bank provided all relevant facts in its affidavit supporting the suit.  

He 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. 

He also noted that no law restricts their constitutional right to seek judicial redress for disputes. 

The lawyers further stated that Nduka Obaigbena, Efe Damilola Obaigbena, and Olabisi Eka Obaigbena are named in the suit in their capacities as directors of GHL.

Ogude urged the court to dismiss GHL’s suit as incompetent and set a date for the hearing of the substantive suit.

After considering the arguments presented, the judge reserved the ruling for a later date, which will be communicated to both parties.

Chioma Kalu

Follow us on:

ON NOW