Nestoil Limited has dragged eight Nigerian banks and the African Export-Import Bank (Afreximbank), before the Federal High Court in Abuja, seeking restraining orders to halt receivership proceedings against it following a Notice of Default.
The legal teams representing Nestoil Limited and the eight Nigerian banks — including Access Bank, FBNQuest Merchant Bank Limited, and Afreximbank, appeared before Justice Mohammed Umar on Wednesday.
Last week the media widely reported that armed officers of the Nigeria Police Force (NPF) sealed the headquarters of Nestoil Limited in Victoria Island, Lagos, following a Federal High Court order freezing the company’s assets, bank accounts, and shares over an alleged $1.01 billion and N430 billion debt owed to FBNQuest Merchant Bank Limited and First Trustees Limited, both subsidiaries of First Bank of Nigeria Limited.
In Nestoil’s motion on notice, dated October 28, its lead counsel, Mofesomo Tayo-Oyetibo (SAN), sought an order of interlocutory injunction, pending the hearing and determination of the substantive suit.
The motion seeks to restrain the defendants, by themselves, their officers, agents, servants, receivers/managers, liquidators, or any persons acting under their authority, from enforcing or further enforcing the Notice of Default dated May 30, 2025, or any similar notice issued pursuant to the Common Terms Agreement (CTA) dated September 2022.
The senior advocate also urged the court to restrain the defendants from commencing or continuing any legal action, proceeding, or receivership against Nestoil.
He further requested that the defendants be restrained from publishing or indicating in any public medium or credit bureau that Nestoil, its obligors, or guarantors are indebted to them.
Tayo-Oyetibo argued that the respondents are allegedly making “wrongful demands and threats” against his client.
He maintained that Nestoil has “substantially performed its obligations under the CTA and underlying facility agreements,” adding that the company has repaid hundreds of millions of dollars to the banks under the said agreements.
However, he noted that by letters dated May 13 and May 30, 2025 (referred to as “the May Letters”), the 10th respondent issued demand notices to Nestoil under the CTA, alleging indebtedness.
The counsel urged the court to hold that the banks’ alleged refusal to provide Nestoil with its account statements, coupled with their reliance on “opaque computed figures” to make debt recovery threats, was unlawful and oppressive.
However, in a motion on notice filed by Babajide Okun (SAN), the respondents urged the court to strike out Nestoil’s suit for being incompetent and an abuse of court process.
Okun argued that the case constituted a “multiplicity of actions” as the same principal parties and subject matter were already pending before the Federal High Court in Lagos.
He noted that the Abuja suit attempts to relitigate issues already before the Lagos court.
He further contended that Nestoil, currently under receivership, lacks the legal standing (locus standi) to initiate the present suit without the consent or approval of the appointed receiver/manager.
He urged the court to regard the present suit as an affront to its jurisdiction.