Court Orders Against Nestoil and Neconde Expire, Raising Legal and Operational Questions
In a significant legal development, the ex parte orders secured by FBNQuest Merchant Bank Limited and First Trustees Limited against Nestoil Limited and Neconde Energy Limited have officially expired, legal authorities confirm. The orders, which had frozen assets and permitted a takeover, lapsed on November 13, 2025, by operation of law.
A Timeline of the Court’s Interim Ruling
This legal saga began on October 22, 2025, when Justice D. I. Dipeolu of the Federal High Court in Lagos granted the interim orders. The plaintiffs, both subsidiaries of First Bank of Nigeria Plc, had sought and received a ruling that effectively froze the assets of Neconde Energy Limited and Nestoil. The court also permitted a Receiver/Manager, Mr. Abubakar Sulu-Gambari, SAN, appointed by Nestoil’s lenders, to take control of these assets.
This included a highly strategic asset: Neconde’s interest in OML 42. Furthermore, the companies were barred from operating their accounts or dealing with shares across numerous Nigerian financial institutions. Following the ruling, the Receiver/Manager reportedly took possession of the companies’ Victoria Island, Lagos head office and attempted to disrupt crude oil production activities within the oil mining lease.
The Legal Mechanism Behind the Expiration
So, what changed? The expiration hinges on a specific provision within the Federal High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules, 2019. According to legal experts, Order 26 Rule 10(1) and (3) stipulates that an ex parte order automatically expires 14 days after the affected party files a motion to have it set aside, unless the court explicitly rules otherwise in the interest of justice.
The defendants in this case filed precisely such a motion on October 30, 2025. With that filing, a 14-day countdown began. Since the court had not heard the motion by November 13, and no extension was granted, the orders ceased to have any legal effect. This rule acts as a crucial safeguard, preventing temporary measures from dragging on indefinitely without a full hearing.
Protecting the Right to a Fair Hearing
Legal commentators emphasize that this 14-day limit is not a mere technicality; it is fundamentally tied to the constitutional right to a fair hearing as guaranteed by Section 36(1) of the 1999 Constitution. “An ex parte order is, by its very nature, made without the other party being present and is meant to last for a very short period,” explained one senior lawyer. “The law protects against the abuse of judicial power and ensures that one party cannot be permanently harmed by an order obtained behind their back.”
They further cited established legal precedents which confirm that Mareva injunctions (asset-freezing orders) are intended as temporary, stop-gap measures. The idea is to preserve the status quo just long enough for a proper, inter-partes hearing where both sides can present their case.
What Does This Mean for Enforcement?
The expiration of these orders has immediate and practical consequences. With the legal basis for the asset freeze and receivership now void, any continued enforcement action lacks a legitimate foundation. “There is no longer any legal basis for continued occupation of premises or assets, or for enforcing an expired order,” a legal analyst stated.
This implies that agencies or individuals involved in enforcing the now-expired orders should immediately vacate the premises and relinquish control of the affected assets. Any further action would require a new, valid court order. Unless the plaintiffs secure a fresh motion or a court explicitly extends the orders—neither of which had occurred at the time of the expiration—the legal landscape has reverted to its pre-October 22 state.
This case serves as a potent reminder of the delicate balance in commercial litigation between providing urgent relief and upholding the fundamental principles of justice. For Nestoil and Neconde, the expiration marks a critical, if potentially temporary, legal reprieve.
Source: Original reporting on the expiration of court orders against Nestoil Limited and Neconde Energy Limited.