Why Freezing Order Against My Accounts Is Abuse Of Court Process – Nduka Obaigbena

In a statement titled “To Whom It May Concern,” the solicitors, Abiodun Layonu & Co., who also represent General Hydrocarbons Limited, a company owned by Mr. Obaigbena, expressed strong objections to the freezing order issued by the Federal High Court in Ikoyi, Lagos, on December 30, 2024.

Freezing Order Details

The court order restrained Nigerian commercial banks from releasing or handling funds up to $225.8 million in accounts linked to Mr. Obaigbena, his family members Efe Damilola Obaigbena and Olabisi Eka Obaigbena, and their company, General Hydrocarbons Limited. As directors and shareholders of the company, all three were implicated in the ruling, which also extended to the company’s agents, subsidiaries, and affiliates.

The order prevents the transfer or use of the said funds across accounts and assets until the case is resolved. However, Mr. Obaigbena’s legal team has raised serious concerns about the legitimacy of the order and the alleged procedural violations surrounding its issuance.

Allegations of Judicial Misconduct

The solicitors argued that the freezing order contravenes a previous judgment by the same Federal High Court delivered by Justice A. Lewis-Allagoa on December 12, 2024. That ruling explicitly barred First Bank from enforcing any financial claims or security interests against General Hydrocarbons until ongoing arbitration proceedings were concluded.

“The Federal High Court, per Allagoa, J, unequivocally restrained First Bank from taking any steps to enforce security, receivables, instruments, or financial documents related to our client’s assets,” the lawyers stated. They emphasized that the prior ruling, which followed the hearing of both parties, remained valid and had not been overturned on appeal.TOP NEWS TODAY! VIDEO FINALLY LE4KED, GOES VIRAL AS ANOTHER POLITICIAN C4UGHT STOCKING HOUSE WITH BUNDLES OF DOLLAR NOTES| TAP HERE TO SEE THE FULL V!DEO HOW HE WAS C4UGHT.

The lawyers further accused First Bank of deliberately concealing the earlier court decision from Justice Deinde Dipeolu, who issued the December 30 ex-parte freezing order. “This is a blatant abuse of court process, as FBN sought to overreach our client by approaching another judge of the same court to secure favorable orders that directly contradict an existing ruling,” the statement read.

Background to the Dispute

The legal battle stems from allegations that General Hydrocarbons assumed a $718 million liability related to First Bank’s transactions with Atlantic Energy Drilling Concept Nigeria Limited. However, the December 12, 2024, judgment had barred First Bank from presenting any financial reports suggesting that General Hydrocarbons or Mr. Obaigbena was responsible for the debt.

Justice Lewis-Allagoa had also issued an injunction preventing First Bank from obstructing General Hydrocarbons’ access to loans or funding for Oil Mining Lease (OML) 120, a critical asset operated by the company. Additional orders prohibited First Bank from appointing any asset managers or operators for OML 120 pending the conclusion of arbitration between the parties.

Legal and Financial Implications

The recent freezing order raises questions about the integrity of judicial processes in high-stakes financial disputes. General Hydrocarbons’ legal team emphasized the severe implications of First Bank’s actions on the company’s operations and reputation. “The freezing order is an attempt to cripple our client’s business interests and undermine their legal rights,” the solicitors said.

Observers have noted that the conflicting rulings highlight a systemic challenge within Nigeria’s judiciary, where inconsistent judgments from courts of equal jurisdiction can undermine the rule of law. Legal experts are calling for a comprehensive review of how ex-parte orders are issued, especially in matters with significant economic and reputational stakes.

Next Steps

As the arbitration proceedings continue, Mr. Obaigbena’s legal team has vowed to challenge the freezing order and seek remedies for what they describe as an “unethical and illegal” attempt by First Bank to enforce disputed claims. First Bank, including its chairman Femi Otedola, has yet to comment on the allegations or the legal proceedings.TOP NEWS TODAY! VIDEO FINALLY LE4KED, GOES VIRAL AS ANOTHER POLITICIAN C4UGHT STOCKING HOUSE WITH BUNDLES OF DOLLAR NOTES| TAP HERE TO SEE THE FULL V!DEO HOW HE WAS C4UGHT.

This case serves as a litmus test for corporate governance and judicial integrity in Nigeria, as both parties prepare for what could become a landmark decision in the country’s financial and legal sectors.…Read_ The_ Full: Story_ Here.