In a pivotal development in the ongoing legal conflicts impacting Nigeria's oil sector, a group of foreign financial institutions, including Glencore Energy UK Limited, Africa Finance Corporation, Mauritius Commercial Bank, and Fidelity Bank, have launched a lawsuit against FBN Trustees Limited.
The lawsuit specifically targets FBN Trustees and the appointed receiver, Abubakar Sulu-Gambari SAN, over claims that the foreign creditors are being subjected to an unlawful appropriation of Neconde Energy Limited's interests in the valuable Oil Mining Lease 42 (OML 42).
The lenders assert that the appointment of Abubakar Sulu-Gambari SAN as Receiver/Manager represents an illegal attempt to enact a subordinate security arrangement that infringes on their rights.
Background: The Contested Ownership of Neconde and OML 42
Neconde Energy Limited, a significant entity within Nigeria's oil and gas landscape, retains a 45% stake in OML 42, an asset of crucial significance.
The foreign lenders, which include an international oil trading firm and various global financial institutions alongside Fidelity Bank, provided credit facilities to Neconde with FBN Trustees designated as their security trustee based on mutually agreed terms.
This conflict stems from the intricate relationships between Neconde, the international lenders, and a coalition of Nigerian banks known as the 'Nestoil Lenders.'
The Nestoil lenders encompass First Bank Limited and FBN Trustees—a group connected to First Bank Nigeria Limited that acts as the trustee for the Nestoil lenders.
Allegations: Breach of Fiduciary Duty and Unauthorized Security Creation
Central to the lawsuit are allegations that FBN Trustees violated its fiduciary duties and trust responsibilities by facilitating the establishment of a secondary security interest regarding Neconde’s assets in OML 42, intended for the benefit of the Nestoil lenders.
The foreign lenders argue that this security interest was created through a Deed of Charge executed by FBN Trustees, despite having received no prior approval from them—something clearly outlined in the initial lending agreement with FBN Trustees.
Moreover, the legal filing emphasizes that Neconde DOES NOT OW the Nestoil Lenders, which would render the establishment of this security without explicit consent entirely improper.
Foreign Lenders’ Stance: Claims and Legal Justifications
The plaintiffs maintain that FBN Trustees acted with full awareness of the necessity for their prior approval and, after receiving a definitive refusal, still moved forward to create the disputed security interest.
They claim this constitutes a significant breach of trust and fiduciary duty, putting FBN Trustees at risk of liability for serving the interests of parties lacking a legitimate claim to Neconde’s assets.
The foreign lenders seek damages and court orders to annul the disputed security, dismiss FBN Trustees from its role as security trustee, and remove Abubakar Sulu-Gambari SAN as the alleged receiver.
They are also requesting the court to enforce and clarify the priority clauses within the facility agreement, debenture, and intercreditor deed, and to assess the legality of the additional security and the receiver's appointment.
In a supporting document related to an originating summons dated December 11, 2025, the plaintiffs contended that the December 2022 Deed of Charge is null, void, and lacking legal effectiveness due to its execution without their consent.
Consequences: A Complicated Turn in First Bank Litigation and the Investment Environment
This case introduces a complex dynamic to the existing court conflicts involving entities connected to First Bank Nigeria, Neconde, and Nestoil.
Legal analysts have indicated that the presence of several international lenders and accusations regarding the fraudulent establishment of security could lead to significant ramifications.
This situation poses important ethical dilemmas concerning governance and transparency in Nigeria's banking sector, which could potentially shake investor confidence and cast doubt on the nation's investment landscape.
Critics caution that if not addressed, such legal disputes may deter future foreign investments and tarnish the reputation of Nigeria's financial institutions.
Conclusion: Anticipated Developments and Industry Attention
As the court deliberates the claims put forth by the foreign lenders, key stakeholders in both the banking and oil industries are vigilantly observing the proceedings.
Comments (0)
You must be logged in to comment.
Be the first to comment on this article!