CASE DIGEST - ARBITRATION: A COMPANY UNDER RECEIVERSHIP RETAINS THE RIGHT TO CHALLENGE THE RECEIVERSHIP THROUGH COUNSEL OF ITS CHOICE

CASE DIGEST – ARBITRATION: A COMPANY UNDER RECEIVERSHIP RETAINS THE RIGHT TO CHALLENGE THE RECEIVERSHIP THROUGH COUNSEL OF ITS CHOICE

CASE DIGEST – ARBITRATION: A COMPANY UNDER RECEIVERSHIP RETAINS THE RIGHT TO CHALLENGE THE RECEIVERSHIP THROUGH COUNSEL OF ITS CHOICE

NECONDE ENERGY LIMITED v. FBNQUEST MERCHANT BANK LIMITED & 4 ORS

SUPREME COURT OF NIGERIA

(GARBA; AGIM; TSAMMANI; ADAH; IDRIS, JJ.SC)

Nestoil Limited (3rd Respondent) became indebted to a consortium of banks under a syndicated arrangement, albeit structured as bilateral transactions amounting to the cumulative sum of ₦244,776,613,049.69 and $586,977,502.59, with interest. To restructure and streamline the administration of the loan facilities, the lenders entered into a Common Terms Agreement dated 8 December 2022, otherwise referred to as the Global Club Deal. FBNQuest Merchant Bank Limited (1st Respondent), acted as the facility agent for the lenders, while First Trustees Limited (2nd Respondent) acted as the global security agent under the transaction. As security for the indebtedness, Neconde Energy Limited (the Appellant) executed a Deed of Charge in favour of the 2nd Respondent, charging its interest in OML 42 JV together with other assets, both as security and as a source of repayment of the facilities. Ernest Azudialu-Obiejesi and Nnena Azudialu-Obiajesi (4th and 5th Respondents) also guaranteed the facilities and pledged their assets as collateral security. Under the terms of the security arrangement, the 2nd Respondent was empowered, upon default in repayment, to enforce the security and recover the indebtedness either directly or through the appointment of a receiver/manager over the charged assets.

DOWNLOAD FILE