Court orders Oil and Gas firm to pay Petroleum Ministry $45.54m crude oil royalties debt
By Onyewuchi Ojinnaka
A Federal High Court sitting in Lagos has ordered an oil and gas firm, Express Petroleum and Gas Limited to pay sum of $45, 546, 270.89 million debt to Federal Ministry of Petroleum Resources/ Department of Petroleum Resources (plaintiffs), being the accrued crude oil royalties, concession rentals and gas flare penalties for the period ranging from 1995 to 2019.
The order for payment of the aforementioned sum was made by the presiding judge, Justice Chukwujekwu Aneke in his judgement on Suit No FHC /L/CS /1425 /2019 between the Minister of Petroleum Resources/ the Director, Department of Petroleum Resources(plaintiffs) and Express Petroleum and Gas Limited (defendant).
The plaintiffs had on August 16, 2019 filed a Suit by way of Writ of Summons and Statement of Claim against the defendant.
Among the reliefs sought by the plaintiffs in their Statement of Claim are a declaration that the plaintiffs are entitled by the relevant provisions of the Petroleum Act to collect crude oil and gas sales royalties, concession rental fees and gas flare penalties from every company holding an Oil Mining Lease (OML) in the Federal Republic of Nigeria; a declaration that the defendant applied for and was issued with an Oil Mining Lease more precisely designated as OML 108 which lease commenced on the 1st of November, 1995.
The plaintiffs further sought a declaration that the defendant is indepted to them in the sum of 45, 546, 270. 89 USD, being accrued crude oil royalties, concession rentals and gas flare penalties for the period ranging from 1995 to 2019. ; an order of the court directing the defendant to pay forthwith to the plaintiffs the sum of 45, 546, 270. 89 USD being the accrued crude oil royalties, concession rentals and gas flare penalties for the period ranging from 1995 to 2019., amongst other reliefs.
Express Petroleum and Gas Limited did not enter appearance nor filed any processes in defence of the suit.
However, on February 22, 2021, the plaintiffs called their sole witness Mr Benjamin Abu Ewuga who adopted his Statement on Oath made on August 19, 2019 and tendered exhibits P1 to P14.
He was not cross examined by the defendant despite several hearing notices served on the defendant.
On March 28, 2023, the court foreclosed the right of the defendant to cross examine the witness and adjourned for adoption of final written addresses by the parties.
On September 17, 2024, the plaintiffs filed and adopted their written address dated September 13, 2024 in which they framed only one issue for determination.
They argued that by the aggregate of facts and evidence adduced before the court, have proved their case on the balance of probabilities and therefore entitled to the declaratory reliefs sought in the case.
After going through the processes filed by the plaintiffs and the submissions in their final address, the court in its judgement held that the sole issue formulated by the plaintiffs is apt and capable of determining the issues involved in the case.
The court cited plethora of authorities to buttress the submission of the plaintiffs, noting that the issues canvassed by the plaintiffs were not in any way rebutted and/or challenged by the defendant.
“This honourable court has no option than to accept same in prove of the plaintiffs’ claims.
“In the instant case, the defendant despite being duly served with the originating processes and series of hearing notices neither entered appearance nor filed any processes in defence of the case against it”
” There was therefore nothing to put on its own side of the imaginary scale to weigh it in determining which is heavier so as to know if its evidence is admissible, relevant, credible, conclusive and /or more probable than that given by the plaintiffs.
It is the law that facts pleaded and not disputed, challenged or controverted are taken as admitted.
It implies that a defendant who fails to traverse or join issues with the claimant on his averments, is deemed to admit the facts pleaded against him.
The court held that the evidence of PW1 was not challenged, noting that the law states that an unchallenged and uncontroverted evidence is generally accepted and acted upon by the court.
Justice Aneke in the judgement said that upon the above settled position of the law , the plaintiffs have proved their case against the defendant and entitled to the reliefs sought in this case.
“In the result, I hereby make the following Orders :
“A declaration that the plaintiffs are entitled by the relevant provisions of the Petroleum Act to collect crude oil and gas sales royalties , concession rental fees and gas flare penalties from every company holding an Oil Mining Lease (OML) in the Federal Republic of Nigeria on behalf of the Federal Government of Nigeria.
“A declaration that the defendant applied for and was issued with an Oil Mining Lease more precisely designated as OML 108 which lease commenced on the 1st of November 1995.
“A declaration that the defendant is obligated by the relevant provisions of the Petroleum Act to pay crude oil royalties, concession rentals and gas flare penalties to the plaintiffs in respect of OML 108.
“A declaration that the defendant is indepted to the plaintiffs in the sum of 45, 546, 270. 89 USD being accrued crude oil royalties, concession rentals and gas flare penalties for the period ranging from 1995 to 2019.
“An order of the court directing the defendant to pay forthwith the sum of 45, 546, 270.89 USD, being the accrued crude oil royalties, concession rentals and gas flare penalties for the period ranging from 1995 to 2019.
” 10 percent post judgement interest on the judgement sum until judgement sum is fully liquidated.
“Cost of N500,000 is awarded in favour of the plaintiffs against the defendant, ” the judge ordered.
