32 years debt: Court orders Agip to pay community N11.7b compensation
JUSTICE Inyang Ekwo of the Federal High Court, Abuja has ruled that Nigeria Agip Oil Company Limited should pay N11.7 billion as rent/ compensation for the 32 years it owed Ogba/ Egbema/ Ndoni Gas Wellhead to the landlord’s family represented by Ongelga Oil and Gas.
The ruling followed a consent judgment of the court after the parties agreed to adopt the terms of settlement between them dated July 14, 2021 and filed on July 16, 2021.
The plaintiffs in the suit marked FHC ABJ CS 1482, are Ogba/ Egbema/ Ndoni and Gas well- head landlords’ family ( Ongelga Oil and Gas landlord family suing through their counsel) and Institute of Environment Limited.
They had sued Nigeria Agip Oil Company, with seven banks as Garnishee over non- payment of compensation rate to them for the use of their land.
Upon being satisfied that the terms of settlement represent the intention of parties to settle, the court entered the consent judgment to the effect that the plaintiffs shall submit to the defendant, applications for payment of land rent in respect of land leased by the defendant from the landlords who have donated power of attorney to the defendant, to settle any due and unpaid rent at the defendant’s current rate of N30,000 per hectare yearly.
The fee is for the payment of the differentials attributable to the increment in rent from January 1, 2017 to December 31, 2020 and a further advance payment from January 2021 to December 2022, taking into account the land rent already paid to the landlords for the said period.
“That the land rent payable in respect of any verified application shall be paid to the landlord or his duly authorised attorney or agent, as shall be communicated to the defendant.
“That the defendant shall promptly authorise its banker( s) to pay rent in respect of any verified application, upon these terms of the settlement. “That the plaintiffs hereby accept not to make any further claim, file any petition or lawsuit in any forum against the defendant, its directors, affiliates, joint venture partners, agents, privies, servants, successors and assigns, in connection with the subject matter of this suit, and shall indemnify, protect, and hold harmless the defendant, its directors, affiliates, joint venture partners, agents, privies, servants, successors and assigns from and against all losses, damages, claims disturbances, interruptions and actions,” the consent decision reads.
It further stated that proceedings, costs and expenses ( including but not limited to attorney’s fees, legal costs and judgment debts) pertaining to or in connection with the defendant’s compliance with the terms of the settlement, shall not be construed as admission of any liability whatsoever on the part of the defendant in respect of the subject matter of the suit or any matter connected to the subject matter of this suit.
The plaintiffs, in their originating summons dated September 27, 2019 prayed the court to determine whether by the provisions of Sections 32 and 37 of the First Schedule of the Petroleum Act, Cap. P. 10, LFN 2004, t he defendant was liable to pay rent/ fair and adequate compensation for the disturbance of surface or other rights to the plaintiffs, who own and are in lawful occupation of Ogba/ Egbema/ Ndoni Local Government Area.
The land, they said, covers an area of 1,499 square Kilometre of which the defendant currently occupies about 650 Square Kilometre and is operating an Oil Mining Lease ( OML) 61.
They also asked the court to determine if the failure of the defendant to pay fair and adequate rent/ compensation to the plaintiffs is contrary to the provision of the relevant provisions of Section 32 and 37 of the First Schedule of the Petroleum Act, Cap. P. 10, LFN, 2004 which deals with fair and adequate compensation as well as rent.
Also , part of the issue for determination was whether the N120 per m2 agreed by the Oil Producers Trade Section ( OPTS) Subcommittee on Land Acquisition held on Tuesday, December 13, 1994, which report was signed by a representative to the defendant provided for the adoption of the draft compensation rates schedule prepared by the subcommittee on compensation rates and matters amount to fair and adequate rent. Among other prayers, they also wanted the court to determine if with regard to issues 1, 2 and 3, the plaintiffs are entitled to the sum of $ 6.9billion only or N2,496,000,000,000 being rent/ compensation for 32 years, from 1994 to 2027 owed by the defendant.
After the adoption of the terms of settlement as consent judgment, the judgment c reditor brought a motion ex parte dated October 14, 2021, seeking an order attaching the amount standing to the credit of the judgment debtor in any account operated by it with all or any of the Garnishes ( Commercial banks) in satisfaction of the Judgement sum of N11.7billion.
They also sought an order directing the Garnishees to pay to the judgment creditor the sum of N11.7 billion only from the amount standing to the credit of the judgment debtor with the Garnishees to satisfy the judgment debt.
The court granted the reliefs on October 15, 2021 and the Garnishees, on the order of the court, filed their various affidavits to show cause. Dissatisfied, the judgment debtor filed a motion on notice dated October 27, 2021, seeking to set aside the Garnishee Order Nisi made by the Court on October 15, 2021, as well as an order a warding exemplary cost of N10 million against the judgment creditor.
Th e j udgment debtor hinged the motion because, the Order Nisi made by the Court was obtained by deceit, misrepresentation, and suppression of the facts/ state of affairs between the parties as the judgment creditor deliberately failed to disclose to the Court that the judgment debtor has made some payments to the judgment creditor in compliance with the consent judgment sought to be enforced.
It argued further that the order made by the Court was procured by fraud as the judgment creditor knowingly concealed material facts within its knowledge that the sum of N11.7 billion sought to be recovered by the garnishee proceeding cannot be found anywhere in the consent judgment made by the Court on July 23, 2021 but was solely calculated by the judgment creditors contrar y to established position of law.
“The commencement of this garnishee proceeding by the judgment creditor is in derogation of the consent judgment made by this Court as the judgment creditor violates the undertaking under the terms of a settlement reached with the judgment debtor not to seek enforcement of non- compliance with the terms of the settlement,” it said.