The Nation Newspaper

Tag: Court

  • Oil spill: Ijaw protest court ruling on $1.5b compensation suit

    Ijaw communities in Bayelsa State at the weekend protested the Appeal Court’s ruling on the $1.5 billion compensation suit against Shell Petroleum Development Company (SPDC) of Nigeria over oil spillage in their communities.

    The two chambers of the National Assembly had ordered Shell to pay the $1.5 billion compensation to the 145 Ijaw communities in Bayelsa State for the hazards the company caused them.

    But Shell disagreed with the National Assembly’s order.

    The Ijaw communities filed a suit against the company at a Federal High Court and obtained what they called an unfavorable judgment.

    The court upheld the National Assembly’s proclamation on the matter.

    Not satisfied, Shell approached the Appeal Court, sitting in Port Harcourt, the Rivers State capital. The court struck out the case on the ground that the National Assembly was not competent to award monetary penalties.

    Spokesman of the affected Ijaw communities, Chief Pere Ajuwa, disagreed with the ruling.

    He said the ruling did not take into cognisance the various evidence the communities’ lawyer presented.

    Ajuwa, a former presidential candidate of the Alliance for Democracy (AD) in the 2007 general elections, told reporters in Abuja that the ruling was a miscarriage of justice.

    The spokesman noted that there was overwhelming evidence of deaths, oil spillages and environmental pollution in the communities because of Shell’s exploration activities.

    He said the communities would petition the National Judicial Council (NJC) to investigate the matter.

    Ajuwa said: “We have been in a battle with Shell Development Petroleum Company of Nigeria. When the traditional rulers’ council of Bayelsa State invited me to handle the case, I gave them my conditions, which included non-violence from any Ijaw group.

    “In 2003, a commission of enquiry was called at the National Assembly and there has not been any case of violence against Shell since that period till now.

    “But in this process, we have been undermined, even by certain agents of government and Shell. The commission of enquiry specified that 1,247 indigenes of Bayelsa State died because of Shell’s oil pollution. There was an unmitigated outbreak of cholera and other water-borne diseases. This figure was confirmed by the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC) and the Federal Ministry of Petroleum Resources.

    “I have never seen a place where blood is shed, yet the law enforcement agencies and, even the Judiciary, would shut their eye to the people’s grievances. The Ijaw have kept faith with the non-violence agreement they reached with me.

    “The National Assembly proclaimed that Shell was guilty of environmental degradation, which led to the death of several people. Shell was asked to pay the 145 Ijaw communities in Bayelsa State $1.5 billion. But Shell went through the courts and said the National Assembly could not give a legislative judgment or award such an amount of money to the Ijaw nation.”

  • Order against new electricity tariff subsisting, says court

    Order against new electricity tariff subsisting, says court

    Justice Mohammed Idris of the Federal High Court in Lagos yesterday renewed the order restraining the Nigerian Electricity Regulatory Commission (NERC) from implementing the new electricity tariff.

    The new billing for power consumption was to take effect from June 1.

    Justice Idris, in a short ruling, held: “The ex-parte order remains valid and subsisting.”

    The judge had restrained NERC and the electricity distribution companies from effecting any increment in electricity tariff pending the hearing and determination of a suit by a Lagos lawyer, Toluwani Adebiyi.

    Yesterday, Adebiyi said NERC had been served but was yet to respond. He urged the court to renew the order so as to preserve the subject matter of the suit.

    He said: “My Lord, everybody is affected. Even this court is running on generator. There is a need to stop them from increasing the electricity tariff because Nigerians can’t afford such and there is no justification for such increment.”

    NERC’s legal officer Ifeanyi Umunna said the commission had complied with the interim orders, adding that the commission was in the process of appointing a lawyer to defend the suit. He pleaded for more time to do so.

    Adebiyi, in the suit, is seeking an order restraining the NERC from implementing any upward review of electricity tariff without a meaningful and significant improvement in power supply at least for 18 hours in a day in most communities in Nigeria.

    He also wants an order restraining the NERC from foisting compulsory service charge on pre-paid meters not until “the meters are designed to read charges per second of consumption and not a flat rate of service not rendered or power not used.”

    He also wants the service charge on pre-paid meters not to be enforced until there is visible efficient and reliable power supply like those of foreign countries where the idea of service charge was borrowed.

    Adebiyi is asking for an order of court mandating the NERC to do the needful and generate more power to meet the electricity use of Nigerians, adding that the needful should include and not limited to a multiple long-term financing approach, sourced from the banks, capital market, insurance and other sectors of finance to power the sector.

    The lawyer is asking the court to mandate the NERC to make available to all Nigerians within a reasonable time of maximum of two years, prepaid meters as a way to stop the throat-cutting indiscriminate estimated bill and which must be devoid of the arbitrary service charge, but only chargeable on power consumed.

    In an affidavit in support of the suit personally deposed to by the applicant, the lawyer lamented that despite the motto and mission of NERC which were expressly stated as “keeping the light on and to meet the needs of Nigeria for safe, adequate, reliable and affordable electricity,” most communities in Nigeria do not get more than 30 minutes if electricity supply, while the remaining 23 hours and 30 minutes were always without light and in total darkness.

    “Nigeria poor masses are paying an estimated and indiscriminate residential bills ranging from N5,000 to N18,000, spending an average of N15, 000 to N20,000 for fuel to maintain generating set,” he said.

    Justice Idris adjourned till July 9 for hearing.

  • Court nullifies arrest warrant on Kashamu

    Court nullifies arrest warrant on Kashamu

    Ogun East senator-elect Buruji Kashamu won two orders at the Federal High Court in Lagos yesterday.

    One overruled the provisional warrant of arrest secured by the National Drug Law Enforcement Agency (NDLEA) seeking to extradite him to the United States to face drug-trafficking charges.

    Another court ordered that the extradition proceedings should be halted.

    Kashamu secured the orders through Justice Okon Abang and Ibrahim Buba.  on Monday through his lawyers, Dr. Alex Izinyon (SAN) and Mr. Ajibola Oluyede, secured separate orders from both Justices Okon Abang and Ibrahim Buba of the Lagos Division of the court.

    Justice Abang quashed the extradition proceedings and the provisional warrant of arrest issued by another judge of the Federal High Court. Justice Buba restrained the NDLEA from arresting and arraigning Kashamu in furtherance of the extradition charges.

    Kashamu’s lawyer Ajibola Oluyede yesterday took a new application before Justice Buba seeking an order to nullify the provisional warrant of arrest obtained by the NDLEA against his client.

    Oluyede, in a motion on notice, asked the court to nullify the NDLEA’s application to commence extradition proceedings against him in a suit marked FHC/ABJ/CS /479/2015 at a Federal High Court sitting in Abuja.

    The lawyer said despite an earlier order made by Justice Buba last Thursday, the NDLEA had not suspended action on the move to arrest, arraign and extradite Kashamu.

    He said it would be in the interest of justice to grant the fresh application.

    But NDLEA’s lawyer, O. Ichakpa, maintained said the agency had not taken any step to undermine the processes before the court.

    Justice Buba ordered that the NDLEA “shall not in the face of subsisting judgment, orders of the court and processes filed and pending, enforce or put to effect the warrant of arrest dated April 25, 2015.”

    The judge quashed the move to arraign Kashamu on the extradition process filed by the NDLEA on April 28.

    The judge adjourned till June 19 for further hearing of all applications including the committal proceedings instituted by Kashamu against the Attorney General of the Federation and NDLEA Chairman Ahmadu Glade.

    Justice Abang, in a separate application argued by Alex Iziyon (SAN) quashed the extradition proceedings and arrest warrant secured by the NDLEA on Kashamu.

     

     

  • Court orders Nigerian company to pay Swiss firm $12,064,435

    A Federal High Court in Lagos, has ordered Westcom Technologies and Energy Services Limited to pay  $12,064,435 to a Swiss firm  Transclear S.A. as accrued demurrage  on bulk cement bought on credit by the defendant company.

    Justice Musa Kruya was delivering judgment  in a suit filed  by Transclear  S.A. company  through its lawyer Olumide Sofowora (SAN).

    The Managing Director, Mr Attila Paulovits, while being led in evidence by  Sofowora said on September  7, 2009,  his company agreed to supply five cargoes of bulk cement to Westcom  on credit adding  the company was supposed to pay for the consignment as per the terms of the said agreement.

    Paulovits said the  cement was delivered as agreed but it was not discharged from the vessel by the defendant as  and when due.

    He said the failure  to discharge  resulted in the accrual of a demurrage  of $8,500,000.

    Paulovit said  the defendant company pleaded with the plaintiff to continue supply it with cement based on the terms and agreement between them  and promised  to defray the outstanding demurrage.

    He claimed that  thereafter,  additional four ship loads were supplied, adding that the statement of account of the demurrage accrued on the nine vessels showed the defendant was indebted to the plaintiff to the tune of $12,063,435.

    The witness  said the defendants promised to pay the debt but till date  has failed to do so.

    Paulovits tendered seven documents as exhibits to support his claim.

    The defendant company Managing Director,  Kola Sowande, while being led in evidence by his counsel,   C.H. Nwuke, adopted his witness statement on oath  and tendered six documents  in support of his case.

    Under cross examination, he admitted that $12,063,444,96 is being owed the plaintiff.

    He, however,  contended that the plaintiff’s claim is not truly a claim for demurrage as to confer  the requisite jurisdiction on the court to entertain the case.

    The plaintiff did not establish any agreement of carriage of goods by sea between both parties, there was no shipping agreement adding that from which a demurrage claim could ensue. The claim, he said, could only be for a simple debt over which the court has no jurisdiction.

    Sowande said the $12,064,435 claimed by the plaintiff under the agreement was not supported by any consideration since the acknowledgement agreement of the debt was not made under seal.

    In his judgment, Justice Kruya  said “I have reviewed the facts of this case, in civil actions the standard of proof on the preponderance of evidence, consequently, it is the duty of the party to an action to adduce evidence which ought to reasonably  satisfy a court that the facts sought to be proved is established.

    ‘’In conclusion, I am of the firm view that based on the admission of the defendant’s witness under cross-examination alone, the plaintiff has proved his case preponderance of evidence entitling it to judgment.

    “I am of the further view that the agreement dated  October 25, 2011, which was tendered as, exhibit the debt acknowledgement  agreement is valid in law to create an obligation on the defendant to pay the sum of $12,064,435 to the plaintiff since it was voluntarily signed by the defendant first before sending same to the plaintiff for execution.

    ‘’Consequently, judgment is hereby entered in favour of the plaintiff against the defendant as per the writ of summons and interest on the said $12,064,435 at the rate of three percent per annum from  September  29, 2011 till the whole amount is paid.’’

  • Housekeeper bolts with N4.6m jewellery

    Housekeeper bolts with N4.6m jewellery

    For allegedly stealing her employer’s jewellery valued at N4.6 million, a 23-year-old housekeeper, Idowu Adeyeye, was on Monday brought before an Abule-Egba Magistrates’ Court, Lagos.

    The accused, who lives with her employer at Ijaiye Medium Housing Estate, a suburb of Lagos, is facing a three-count charge of conspiracy, stealing and causing a breach of peace.

    The prosecutor, Inspector Rachael Williams told the court that the offences were committed on May 28 at his employer’s residence.

    According to her, the accused with others still at large stole jewellery valued at N4.6 million, property of the complainant, Mrs Titilayo Ogundipe.

    “The complainant got home from work to discover that the door to her room was opened and all her gold jewellery were missing.

    “The housekeeper disappeared after the incident, but was later arrested following a tip-off,’’ Williams said.

    The offence, she noted, contravened Sections 166 (d), 278 and 409 of the Criminal Law of Lagos State, 2011.

    The accused pleaded innocence of the offences.

    The Magistrate, Mrs Adenike Shonubi, granted the accused bail in the sum of N2.5 million with two sureties in like sum.

    She adjourned the case to June 15 for trial

  • Court bars NERC from tariff increment

    Court bars NERC from tariff increment

    AFederal High Court in Lagos yesterday restrained the Nigerian Electricity Regulatory Commission (NERC) from implementing the new electricity tariff billed to be effective from Monday, June 1.

    Ruling on an ex-parte motion filed by a lawyer, Toluwani Adebiyi,  Justice Mohammed Idris restrained NERC and the electricity distribution companies (Discos) from effecting any increment in electricity tariff pending the determination of the suit.

    Following the commission’s announcement of proposed increment, Adebiyi had prayed the court to stop NERC and the Discos from foisting further hardship and unjustifiable increment of tariff on Nigerians.

    Adebiyi is seeking an order restraining the NERC from implementing any upward review of electricity tariff without a significant improvement in power supply at least for 18 hours in a day in most communities in Nigerian.

    He wants an order restraining the NERC from foisting compulsory service charge on pre-paid meters not until “the meters are designed to read charges per second of consumption and not a flat rate of service not rendered or power not used.”

    He also wants the service charge on pre-paid meters to not be enforced until there is visible efficient and reliable power supply like those of foreign countries where the idea of service charge was borrowed.

    The lawyer is praying the court to mandate the NERC to do the needful and generate more power to meet the electricity need of Nigerians, adding that the needful should include and not limited to a multiple long-term financing approach, sourced from the banks, capital market, insurance and other finance sectors.

    Granting the applicant to serve the respondents all the processes in its office in Abuja, the judge adjourned the case to June 11.

  • Court declines Kashamu’s request against NDLEA

    Court declines Kashamu’s request against NDLEA

    The Federal High Court stting in Lagos yesterday declined to restrain the Nigeria Drugs Law Enforcement Agency (NDLEA) from arresting Senator-elect Buruji Kashamu.

    Justice Ibrahim Buba made the order consequent upon an ex-parte order brought by Kashamu’s lawyer Ajibola Oluyede.

    Kashamu is a financier of the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) in the Southwest. The United States said he has a pending case of heroine trafficking dating back to 1994 to answer, but he insists he is innocent.

    Following the extradition request from the U.S., the NDLEA operatives stormed Kashamu’s residence in Lekki, Lagos on Saturday.

    The siege was still on as at yesterday.

    The NDLEA, in a statement yesterday by its spokesman Mitchel Ofoyeju, said the Ogun-East Senator-elect, “failed to appear in court from his house where he is being closely monitored by operatives of the NDLEA.”

    He added that “the Agency is working hard to ensure that he submits himself to the due process of the law. His house remained cordoned by anti-narcotic officers pending his appearance in court.

    “The extradition move by the NDLEA for Kashamu to answer drug trafficking charges is legal.

    “The Agency has not violated his rights and will continue to work within the confines of the law.

    “He has been assured that due process of the law shall be adhered to at every stage.

    “The NDLEA is the appropriate government Agency to implement his extradition request and will diligently pursue the processes to a logical conclusion.

    “It is expected that Kashamu will willingly submit himself to the laws of the country under which he seeks to serve as a senator.”

    Justice Buba yesterday also ordered the Attorney-General of the Federation, Mohammed Adoke and Chairman NDLEA Ahmadu Giade to appear before him today to explain why they should not be held for contempt for ‘invading’ Kashamu’s residence.

    In an in-chamber ruling, the court declined to entertain the ex-parte motion and ordered Kashamu to put Adoke and Giade on notice to appear before him in order to be heard.

    He ruled that the order was in view of the urgent nature of the matter and in light of subsisting judgment and court orders.

    “In view of the urgent nature of this matter, and in light of subsisting judgment and court orders, instead of hearing an ex-parte application, the respondents are ordered to be put on notice to appear in court on May 26, at 12pm in order to be heard.

    “And in view of subsisting judgment and court orders,  time be and is hereby abridged for the respondents to appear. This order and the motion on notice shall be served unfailingly,” the order stated.

    In a Motion on Notice for committal brought pursuant to order 35 of the Federal High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules, 2009, Oluyede had prayed the court to rule that the respondents are in criminal contempt of court for obstructing justice by the willful violation of a court judgment dated January 6, 2014.

    He prayed the court to declare that the invasion, destruction of property, harassment, humiliation, arrest and detention of Kashamu by NDLEA at the instance of the AGF since Saturday, as well as any extradition proceedings commenced thereupon, constitute criminal contempt in view of the said judgment and another pending ruling before the Federal High Court.

    Oluyede prayed a declaration that the actions of the respondents are illegal, null and void, praying the court for an order directing the immediate and unconditional release of Kashamu within two hours of the pronouncement, just as he urged the court for a restraining order against the respondents from further intimidating, harassing, laying siege or confiscating any of Kashamu’s properties.

    He accused Giade of plot to preempt the judicial process by deploying about 50 fully armed NDLEA officials, pursuant to the verbal instruction of the AGF,  to invade Kashamu’s home around 4am on May 23.

    The lawyer claimed that the Senator-elect’s residence was burgled by the men who put him under house arrest.

    “They broke his gate, doors, windows to gain entrance. Destroyed properties, harassed infant children and his pregnant wife,  humiliated the applicant at gun point, arrested and detained him in his house after attempts to forcibly ship him off to the US truncated by media exposure”.

    Oluyede said his client decided to file a committal charge after NDLEA failed to bring Kashamu in court as they earlier promised.

    He accused the agency of not having any arrest warrant, just as he claimed that the NDLEA had filed no application before any court before unlawfully invading his client’s home.

    “Extradition procedure requires submission of the request to the court for the court to go through and exercise its discretion whether or not, the person being requested should be extradited. That is what will give us confidence that lawful duty is being carried out.

    “In this case, no warrant was shown.  They don’t have any warrant for arrest. Go to the registry now, you will see a gentleman from NDLEA filing application for a provisional warrant of arrest. That is to show you that they do not have any extradition order,” said Oluyede.

    Kashamu’s supporters invaded the court premises protesting the siege to his residence.

    Some of the inscriptions include: “UK court discharged him; Illegal extradition; Kashamu’s life is being threatened; We want due process followed; It is high time we stopped illegality; Kashamu’s arrest is a slap to human rights.”

    The protesters who said they came from Ijebu-Igbo decried the ‘persecution’ of their Senator-elect,  calling on the authorities to leave him alone.

    Former Ogun State People’s Democratic Party (PDP) Secretary, Yemi Akinwunmi who spoke on behalf of the protesters said Kashamu brightened their hope and saved the party from complete death in the state.

    “In the process of liberating us, making us relevant in the politics of Nigeria, he stepped on one or two toes. They are the ones now on him, not America.”

     

  • Court upholds the nomination of Odofin as Oba-elect of Ikorodu

    Justice Akintunde Savage of a Lagos High Court sitting in Ikorodu has upheld the election of the Odofin of Ikorodu, Chief Kabiru Shotobi as the oba-elect to the stool of Ayangburen of the ancient town.

    Justice Savage gave the ruling after taking the arguments of counsels to claimants and respondents in a suit contesting the selection of the oba-elect by the kingmakers of the town.

    The judge held that the nomination of  Shotobi was valid and that he was duly elected by the kingmakers to ascend the throne as the next Ayangburen of Ikorodu and not in breach of the consent judgement in suit IKD/57/2007.

    The court ruled that the first to  third respondents and all other defendants in the matter are also not in breach of the judgement in suit IKD/57/2007.

    The applicants, Mathew Adetayo Shodipo, Omobo Sokelu, Shakiru Shodipo, Nurudeen Fakomaya and Albert Aina had filed a suit, IKD/454GCM/2014 (for themselves and on behalf of the Lambo branch of the Lasunwon ruling house of Ikorodu) and through an originating summon challenged the nomination of Shotobi by the kingmakers as the oba-elect of the ancient town of Ikorodu.

    Joined as  respondents in the suit are Ezekiel Shodipo, Tajudeen Odofin (for themselves and on behalf of the Adegorushen branch of the Lasunwon ruling house of Ikorodu), the Odofin of Ikorodu, Chief Kabiru Shotobi; the Olisa and regent of Ikorodu, Chief Zacheus Oludele Odusoga; Solomade of Ikorodu, Chief Afolabi Adekayaoja; Apena of Ikorodu, Chief Karimu Ore and Oponuwa of Ikorodu, Chief Jacob Kolawole Adaraloye (for themselves and on behalf of the kingmakers of Ikorodu).

    Others are Ikorodu Local Government; Ikorodu division of council of Obas and Chiefs; Secretary, Ikorodu Chieftaincy Committee, Ikorodu Local government: Lagos State Ministry of Chieftaincy Affairs and Attorney General and Commissioner for Justice, Lagos State.

    The applicants, in their application, had prayed the court to determine “whether the consent judgement of a Lagos High Court, Ikorodu division in suit IKD/57/2007 (Mathew Adetayo Shodipo and others versus Ezekiel Shodipo and others) is subsisting and valid; whether parties and privies are bound by the aforesaid judgement until same is set aside on appeal; whether fourth to eighth respondents-kingmakers are bound by the aforesaid judgement being parties in suit no IKD/57/2007 and whether eighth and ninth respondents are not bound as well being parti/privies thereon”.

    They had also prayed the court to determined “whether third defendant/respondent is not bound and stopped from being presented, nominated and selected as a candidate from Lasunwon Ruling House to any future chieftaincy title” and “whether indeed the Adegorushen Branch of the Lasunwon Royal Ruling House is not precluded by the decision in IKD/57/2007 from presenting a candidate for the now vacant title of Ayangburen of Ikorodu?” among others.

    They sought a declaration that the consent judgement of the Lagos High Court dated April 1, 2009 in suit IKD/57/2007 is subsisiting, binding and in force; a declaration that by clause 2 of the consent judgement, the first, second and third respondents conceded the right to the claimants in future to the next chieftaincy title that is due and available to the Lasunwon Ruling House.

    They also sought a declaration that the kingmakers, fourth to seventh respondents were bound by the decision in suit IKD/57/2007 as the seventh to tenth defendants and that they cannot now consider any candidate from the Adegorushen branch of the Lasunwon ruling house and a further declaration that the third respondent, having by the aforesaid judgement, been installed as Odofin of Ikorodu cannotin defiance of the judgement, present himself as a candidate for the vacant Ayangburen Royal Chieftaincy title “and he is thereby stopped from contesting any other vacant Chieftaincy title available to the Lasunwon family.                                                                                                  They had therefore prayed the court for an injunction restraining the fifth to tenth respondents by themselves, agents, privies from considering the third respondent nor any candidate from the Adegorushen branch of the Lasunwon Chieftaincy family for the candidature of the vacant Ayangburen.

    But delieviring his ruling in the matter, Justice Savage  said the defendants have not breached the order of the court and therefore declined to restrain them.

  • Court assumes jurisdiction over N100m suit filed against developer

    Court assumes jurisdiction over N100m suit filed against developer

    A Lagos State High Court sitting in Epe has assumed jurisdiction over the suit filed by Homeowners within the Pearl Garden Estate situated at Sangotedo Village in Eti-Osa Local Government Area of the state against a property developer, Oyetubo Jokotade Estate Resource Limited.

    The claimants had sued the property developer before the court over alleged incessant harassment and imposition of arbitrary charges.

    Joined as second defendant in the suit is CMB Building Maintenance and Investment Company Limited, which is in charge of providing estate management services.

    The N100 million suit was instituted by Messrs Francis Adesuyi, Felix Obiakor, Martin Ajayi-Obe and Peter Afenotan on behalf of themselves and all interested homeowners within the Pearl Garden Estate.

    The trial judge,  while assuming jurisdiction over the suit, dismissed the defendants application which prayed for the matter to be referred to arbitration.

    The judge in his ruling, held that the defendants had already  taken certain steps in the suit which had conferred jurisdiction on the court.

    Justice  Bashua also  fixed June 15, 2015 for hearing of an interlocutory application dated February 19, 2015 which was filed by the claimant’s counsel, Mr Adeyinka Adeyemi.

    He directed the defendant’s counsel, Mr. Gabriel Uwaifo, to file his reply in order for the court to hear arguments on the said application.

    In the application, the claimants are asking the court for an Order of Interlocutory Injunction restraining the defendants and their agents from harassing or restricting the movement of the homeowners within the estate, pending the hearing an determination of the substantive suit.

    They also asked for:”an Order of Interlocutory Injunction restraining the defendants and their agents from interfering with the rights of the homeowners in providing safe and drinkable water for themselves and their family members, pending the hearing an determination of the substantive suit.

    “An Order of interlocutory injunction restraining the defendants and their agents, further demanding or collecting reticulation charges in the sum of N650,000 or any other sums from the claimants contrary to the express terms of the Deeds of Assignment and the Sale and Management Agreement, pending the hearing an determination of the substantive suit.”

    The claimants further asked the court to restrain the defendants and their agents from further collecting the unilaterally imposed N35,000 fee from the homeowners, pending the hearing an determination of the substantive suit.

     

  • Court bars Attorney-General NAPIMS, Total, others from implementing oil field contract

    Court bars Attorney-General NAPIMS, Total, others from implementing oil field contract

    A Federal High Court  in Lagos has restrained  Attorney-General of the Federation, National Petroleum Investment Management Services, (NAPIMS) Nigeria Content Development Monitoring Board, (NCDMB),  Samsung Heavy Industries Nigeria Limited (SHINL), and Total Upstream Nigeria Ltd, and their agents from implementing the  Floating Production Storage and Offloading Unit (FPSO) contract. The FPSO is in the Egina Field within OML130. The order will subsist  pending the determination of the substantive suit.

    The court also restrained the defendants and their agents from implementing the  contract either

    Justice Okon Abang gave the order after listening to the opposing counsel.

    In an affidavit sworn to by the plaintiff, Mr John Iyene Owubokiri, had averred that the scope of Egina FPSO oil field which is expected to produce 200,000 barrels of oil per day as stated by SHINL is expected to create 50,000 jobs, saying this is strategic to the future.

    Owubokiri averred  that there are established guidelines by the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC) for tendering and awarding of fabrication projects in the oil and gas industry. These guidelines were not complied with in the award of the Egina FPSO to Samsung,he alleged, adding that there were breaches of extant laws in the contract award.  The defendants breached provisions of the Nigeria Oil and Gas Industry Content Development (NOGICD)Act 2010 and relevant laws guiding the fiscal regime of the oil and gas industry.

    The NOGICD Act stipulates that NCAMB should supervice, coordinate, monitor and implement  the local content plan in the oil and gas industry. It shall also approves advertisement, qualification criteria, technical bid document, technical evaluation criteria and the proposed bidders list in bids for project in excess of $1 million. The Egina FPSO contract is worth $3,143,499,498.

    Owubokiri  claimed that Total Upstream covert launch by  its call tender without approval of technical stage and commercial template broke the law, standard practice and the established process for tendering in the oil and gas industry.

    The establishment of a fabrication yard in Bayelsa State was part of the local content plan  by Samsung to get the award  contract,  he averred, adding  that this could have created thousands of job, enhanced transfer of technology and skill acquisition for Nigerians.

    But, after the contract award,  Samsung, he claimed, abandoned the establishment of the fabrication yard  and now plans to carry out in South Korea the fabrication work meant to be done in Bayelsa  to the detriment of the economy.

    In a counter-affidavit,  a lawyer, Mr Olajide Oyewole, on behalf of Samsung  while denying some of the plaintiff’s averments  deposed that Owobokiri’s  rights have not been infringed.  ‘’He has not shown that he has suffered any special damage peculiar to himself apart from the public,’’ Oye-wole claimed, urging  the court not to grant the plaintiff’s application.

    Total Upstream,  in an affidavit sworn to by its lawyer, Chidiebere Ejiofor, urged the court to dismiss the plaintiff’s application because his client is challenging the court’s jurisdiction to hear  the suit.  The court ought to hear and determine the preliminary objection first, before entertaining any further motion of the plaintiff, he said.

    Attorney General of the Federation, NAPIMS and MCDMB did not file any response.

    Justice  Abang, in his ruling  adjourning till Thursday, and restrained  the defendants and their agents from implementing the  contract.