Nestoil: Federal High Court Halts Police Presence as Debt Dispute Takes New Turn
In a significant development in the debt dispute between FBNQuest Merchant Bank Limited, First Trustees Limited, and oil and gas firm Nestoil Limited, the Federal High Court in Lagos has ordered the immediate withdrawal of police officers stationed at the company’s premises.
The directive followed a ruling delivered on November 20, 2025, by Justice Daniel Osiagor, which vacated an earlier order authorising law-enforcement presence at the facilities of Nestoil Limited, Neconde Energy Limited, and their directors, Ernest Azudialu-Obiejesi and Nnenna Obiejesi.
In a letter to the Lagos State Commissioner of Police, Deputy Chief Registrar Longwa conveyed the court’s latest position and notified the police that the previous order relied upon for the deployment had been set aside.
The letter, also dated November 20, 2025, referenced Suit No. FHC/L/CS/2127/2025 and confirmed that Justice Osiagor’s ruling nullified the enforcement actions taken in connection with the plaintiffs’ claims. It therefore directed that all officers stationed at the defendants’ premises be withdrawn without delay.
The underlying dispute, filed by FBNQuest Merchant Bank and First Trustees Limited, centres on allegations of substantial indebtedness against Nestoil and its affiliates.
The Court had on Thursday lifted the $1bn Mareva injunction that had frozen Nestoil Limited’s assets and those of its directors, allowing the company and its affiliates to regain control of their funds and property.
Justice Daniel Osiagor, who took over the matter following a directive from the Chief Judge of the Federal High Court, ruled that the injunction granted ex parte on October 22, 2025, by Justice Dehinde Dipeolu had lapsed.
The court held that the order automatically expired 14 days after the defendants filed a motion to discharge it, in line with the Federal High Court Rules.
The Mareva injunction had restrained Nestoil, its affiliate Neconde Energy Limited, and the company’s promoters, Dr. Ernest Azudialu-Obiejesi and Nnenna Obiejesi, from moving funds, selling shares, or accessing other assets across more than 20 financial institutions.
It also empowered First Trustees Limited and FBNQuest Merchant Bank Limited, acting for a consortium of creditor banks, to take possession of Nestoil’s assets under receivership.
During Thursday’s hearing, senior counsel appeared for all parties, Babajide Koku, (SAN), for the plaintiffs, Dr. Muiz Banire, (SAN), for Nestoil, Chief Wole Olanipekun, (SAN), and Mr. Bode Olanipekun, (SAN), for Neconde Energy Limited; and Chinonye Obiagwu, (SAN), and Kehinde Ogunwumiju, (SAN), for other defendants.
Olufemi Oyewole (SAN) represented parties seeking to be joined.
While addressing the court, Koku urged the judge to halt proceedings, citing a pending Notice of Appeal challenging Justice Dipeolu’s November 7, 2025 decision to recuse himself.
Dr. Banire countered, arguing that filing a Notice of Appeal does not automatically stay proceedings, citing the court’s inherent power under Order 32 Rule 1 of the Federal High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules 2025 to issue preservative orders.
Chief Olanipekun stated that the Chief Judge has statutory authority under Section 22(1) of the Federal High Court Act to transfer matters at any stage, adding that previous rulings cannot bind a new judge.
He further told the court that once the matter is transferred, hearings must start afresh, and previous rulings cannot bind the new court.
Counsel Ogunwumiju and Obiagwu argued that the Mareva injunction could not survive the transfer.
Ogunwumiju noted, “An ex parte order automatically lapses 14 days after a defendant files a motion to discharge it. Mareva injunctions are temporary emergency measures and cannot be prolonged indefinitely without violating the constitutional right to fair hearing.”
Obiagwu added that Nestoil and Neconde filed a motion to set aside the order on October 30, making the injunction effectively spent by law as of November 14, 2025.
After taking oral arguments, Justice Osiagor ruled that the ex parte Mareva injunction had expired 14 days after the filing of a motion to set it aside, rendering any arguments based on the order academic.
He affirmed the Chief Judge’s unappealable authority to reassign the case and clarified that filings referencing the previous judge would not delay proceedings.
The court also noted that the decision to transfer the matter to a new judge is not subject to appeal and emphasised that proceedings would not be stayed simply because filings at the Court of Appeal referenced the previous judge.
The order read in part:
“The decision that transferred this matter is not appealable. This Court will not stay proceedings where filings at the Court of Appeal refer to Dipeolu J. and not Osiagor J.
“There is no longer a subsisting ex-parte order, having elapsed 14 days from the Motion on Notice challenging it. As the order has expired, the arguments of parties affected by the ex-parte order are now mute or academic.
The court adjourned the case to 25 November 2025 for the Motion for Joinder and to December 12, 2025 for the hearing of pending applications.
