Justice Adetayo Aluko of the Federal High Court sitting in Lagos, on Friday, nullified the attempt to place General Hydrocarbons Limited (GHL) and its assets under a purported Receiver Manager appointed by the Asset Management Corporation of Nigeria (AMCON).
The judge revoked the receivership while ruling on a Notice of Preliminary Objection filed by the Chairman of General Hydrocarbons Limited, Prince Nduka Obaigbena, who challenged the jurisdiction of the court to entertain the suit.
Naijaonpoint reports that the suit was instituted by the alleged Receiver Manager, Sevi Akinwunmi, seeking to give effect to the purported receivership over General Hydrocarbons Limited and its assets.
In his ruling, Justice Aluko agreed with Obaigbena that the suit amounted to an abuse of court process, given the prior existence of Suit No. FHC/L/CS/1903/2025 – General Hydrocarbons Limited v. AMCON & 3 others.
The court held that the matter before it was improperly commenced in the face of a subsisting suit already dealing with the same subject matter and parties.
Justice Aluko further found that Akinwunmi and his counsel commenced the action in clear breach of existing court orders made by Justice Ambrose Lewis-Allagoa in Suit No. FHC/L/CS/1903/2025.
According to the court, the earlier orders of Justice Lewis-Allagoa, made on September 23, 2025, expressly prohibited AMCON and its agents, privies, nominees or affiliates from appointing or continuing with the appointment of a receiver over General Hydrocarbons Limited and its assets.
Justice Aluko held that Akinwunmi, having been appointed by AMCON, was an agent of the corporation and therefore bound by the said orders.
The court ruled that the commencement of the suit was in direct violation of those subsisting injunctions.
Suppression Of Facts Condemned
Justice Aluko also acknowledged that Akinwunmi and his counsel, Bidemi Ademola-Bello (SAN), deliberately suppressed material facts in filing the suit and in securing interim orders against General Hydrocarbons Limited and its assets.
The judge stated that had the existence of the earlier orders of Justice Lewis-Allagoa been disclosed, the court would not have granted the interim orders made on October 24, 2025.
Upon reviewing the parties and issues in both suits, the court concluded that they were identical or substantially similar, with no justification for instituting a fresh action when the earlier substantive suit was still pending.
On this basis, Justice Aluko held that the suit was an abuse of court process.
The judge warned that the actions of Akinwunmi and his counsel had the potential to undermine the credibility of the judicial process.
He added that such conduct represented a significant waste of the court’s time and resources and should be frowned upon.
Consequently, Justice Aluko dismissed the suit in its entirety and set aside the interim orders earlier granted on October 24, 2025.
Earlier Injunction Against AMCON
Naijaonpoint understands that in the earlier suit, the Federal High Court, on September 23, 2025, expressly barred AMCON, its agents, privies and nominees from appointing or continuing with the appointment of any receiver over General Hydrocarbons Limited or its assets.
Friday’s ruling was described as a major relief for General Hydrocarbons Limited and a reinforcement of the judiciary’s stance against forum shopping, suppression of material facts and attempts to circumvent valid court orders.
In a related decision delivered on Monday, December 8, 2025, Justice Ambrose Lewis-Allagoa invalidated the appearance and appointment of senior lawyer, Oluseye Opasanya (SAN), as counsel for General Hydrocarbons Limited.
The judge held that Opasanya’s engagement by a purported receiver was in flagrant violation of existing injunctions of the court.
Justice Lewis-Allagoa criticised Akinwunmi’s purported appointment of Opasanya, noting that the receiver’s own appointment, said to have been made on September 18, 2025, contravened the injunction issued on September 23, 2025, restraining AMCON from appointing a receiver.
Stressing the sanctity of court orders, Justice Lewis-Allagoa cited the Supreme Court decision in Ngere v. Okuruket, stressing that court orders must be obeyed until set aside.
He stated, “The judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction subsists until upset on appeal. While a judgment subsists, every person affected by it or against whom an order is made must obey it even if it appears wrong.”
The judge also noted that AMCON’s counsel had given a personal undertaking on October 22, 2025, to comply with the court’s directives, but went ahead to file a fresh suit the following day seeking to validate the prohibited receiver appointment.
Justice Lewis-Allagoa stated in part: “In the affidavit of facts deposed by one Seyi Akinwunmi, the deponent claimed to be appointed by the 1st defendant as the receiver of GHL on 18th September, 2025… In my view, the appointment of Mr. Oluseye Opasanya, SAN and Mr. Kayode Adeluola, SAN as counsel for this plaintiff was inappropriate and offends the law.”
He reproduced portions of the September 23, 2025 interim orders restraining the defendants and their agents from enforcing any rights against the applicant or its assets, including the appointment of a receiver or freezing of accounts, pending the determination of the suit.
The judge further held that the appearance of Opasanya on November 26, 2025, “was an act carried out in violation of the valid and subsisting orders of this court made in this suit on 23rd September 2025 and reaffirmed during the proceedings of 22nd October 2025.”
Taken together, the two rulings underscored the judiciary’s intolerance for procedural abuses, conflicting representations and attempts to undermine the authority of subsisting court orders in high-stakes commercial disputes.
© 2025 Naijaonpoint, a division of NOP Media Inc. Contact us via [email protected]