OPL 245: Malabu oil sues FG
The plaintiff, through its lawyer, J.A Achimugu in a writ of summons marked FHC/ABJ/CS/201/2017, is praying the court for a declaration that the rights and interest in OPL 245 granted to it is still valid and subsisting.
It also wants a declaration that, not being a party to the block 245-resolution agreement, dated April 29, 2011, it is therefore not bound by the terms of the said agreement as it relates to or concerns OPL 245.
Furthermore, the plaintiff is seeking a declaration that not being a party to the block 245 resolution agreement dated April 29, 2011, any payment purportedly made by the defendants into any bank account, purporting to be the plaintiff’s bank account and or made to the ninth defendant purportedly in the name of the plaintiff was not payment made in pursuance of the said block 245 resolution agreement.
Additionally, the plaintiff is seeking a declaration that the allocation of OPL 245 by the first and second defendants to the fourth and fifth defendant’s through the second defendant’s letter of May 11, 2011, titled “Re: OPL 245 Resolution Agreement/Letter of Award”, while the plaintiff’s rights and the interests to OPL 245 were subsisting, is in violation of the plaintiff’s exclusive right under paragraph five of the first schedule to the Petroleum Act, to explore and prospect for petroleum within the area covered by OPL 245, and is therefore invalid, wrongful, null and void and of no effect whatsoever. The plaintiff however wants the court to make an order compelling the defendants to restore to it, its right to the exclusive possession of OPL 245.