Facts:

The claimant and the defendant had entered into a memorandum of understanding (MOU) dated 10 September 2002, in order to jointly exploit a marginal fields farmout in respect of “Uquo Marginal Oilfield” for which the claimant had successfully qualified. Owing to a divergence of views the claimant filed a writ and a statement of claim seeking declaratory orders contending that the parties were no longer bound by the terms of the memorandum reason alleged being that they violated or conflicted with the directives of the Special Adviser on Petroleum Matters, the Petroleum Act and industry practice. Further that the arrangement was not entered into in good faith with the intention of signing an agreement based on fairness and/or compliance with the statutory provisions on marginal fields farmout or any other Federal Government Laws and/or international standards, as such the claim alleged that the MOU was null and void.

The alternative claim was for a rectification of the agreement to reflect a different revenue sharing formula between the parties. The defendant merely entered a conditional appearance and filed an application for stay of proceedings contending that the MOU contained an arbitration clause at clause 4.

“All disputes or differences arising from the interpretation and construction of this agreement shall be resolved by arbitration in accordance with Rules of the International Chambers of Commerce, and the place of arbitration shall be in Lagos, Nigeria Law”.