By Olakunle Oke
Indigenous oil and gas firm Nestoil Limited has moved to overturn the receivership and asset-freezing orders issued by the Federal High Court, Lagos, describing them as unlawful, excessive, and obtained without proper jurisdiction.
The controversial orders, granted on October 22, 2025, by Justice Dipeolu, arose from a $640 million syndicated loan dispute between Neconde Energy Limited and a consortium of lenders including FBNQuest Merchant Bank, Mauritius Commercial Bank, and the Africa Finance Corporation (AFC). The consortium, known as the Senior Lenders, secured interim Mareva and receivership orders against Neconde and its affiliates, which included Nestoil.
Through its counsel, Olufemi Oyewole (SAN), Nestoil argued that it is neither indebted to the lenders nor a party to the 2016 Common Terms Agreement (CTA) underpinning the loan. The company maintained that its inclusion in the suit was “unjustified and unlawful,” adding that the plaintiffs deliberately withheld key information from the court to secure sweeping ex parte orders.
According to Nestoil, the interim injunctions have crippled its operations, frozen directors’ accounts, and disrupted crude exports from OML 42, one of Nigeria’s major oil blocks, thereby threatening government revenue. “These orders are profoundly hasty and desperate,” the company said in its motion, adding that the lenders failed to provide accurate financial reconciliations or account statements before seeking the orders.
The case has since taken a dramatic turn, with petitions filed before the National Judicial Council (NJC) and the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court seeking an investigation into Justice Dipeolu’s handling of the matter. The petitioners accused the judge of granting far-reaching ex parte reliefs contrary to established legal principles, urging the Chief Judge to reassign the case to preserve judicial impartiality.
The petitions also questioned why receivership and freezing orders were issued without hearing from the affected parties, despite the winding-up status of some of the companies involved.
Nestoil’s legal team further challenged the legality of the appointed receiver, arguing that the appointment contravened the Companies and Allied Matters Act (CAMA) 2020, which requires receiverships to be properly registered with the Corporate Affairs Commission (CAC).
The company cited Clause 3.4 of the Deed of Charge, insisting that any receivership action must be subordinate to the rights of existing senior secured lenders. It added that any disposition of a company’s assets during winding-up is “void unless otherwise ordered by the court.”
Nestoil also warned that maintaining the current court orders could lead to severe economic consequences, including the disruption of oil production and the erosion of investor confidence in Nigeria’s indigenous energy sector.
Industry analysts have expressed concern that the receivership could paralyze operations at OML 42, once producing over 40,000 barrels of crude oil per day, and further complicate Nigeria’s drive to stabilize oil output amid global energy competition.
The orders reportedly affect several key properties, including the iconic Nestoil Tower on Akin Adesola Street, Victoria Island, which the company described as “an immovable asset unlawfully targeted by the plaintiffs.”
Meanwhile, motions have been filed by Nestoil, Neconde, and other affected firms seeking to vacate or vary the interim orders. The Chief Judge of the Federal High Court is expected to determine whether Justice Dipeolu will continue presiding over the case or step aside pending review.