Federal High Court grants stay of execution on February 13 judgment appointing administrator for AMNI
By Onyewuchi Ojinnaka
Justice Chukwujekwu Aneke of the Federal High Court in Lagos on Thursday granted an order staying execution of the court’s judgment delivered on February 13, 2026, in a suit filed by Cenroc FPSO Solutions Nigeria Ltd against AMNI International Petroleum Development Company Ltd.
The ruling came on a motion for stay of execution pending appeal in suit number FHC/L/CS/1454/2025.
The plaintiff’s action stemmed from a commercial relationship and contractual engagements with AMNI. Cenroc approached the court via an originating application filed on July 23, 2025, seeking, among other reliefs, a declaration that AMNI was unable to pay its outstanding debts and an order appointing Mr. Sam Aiboni as administrator over the defendant’s affairs.
On February 13, 2026, Justice Aneke granted the reliefs and appointed Sam Aiboni as administrator of the company.
Dissatisfied with the judgment and the administrator appointment, AMNI (the respondent/judgment debtor) filed an appeal challenging both and sought a stay of execution pending the appeal’s determination.
Delivering his ruling on Thursday, Justice Aneke held that the applicant had made out a sufficient case for the grant.
The court stated: “Therefore, having carefully considered the materials placed before this honourable court especially Exhibit AO1 attached to the affidavit in support of the application, it is my view that the defendant/applicant has made out a case for the grant of the said application for stay of execution of the judgment of this court delivered on February 13, 2026 and I so hold.”
Consequently, the court ordered: “The judgment debtor’s application for stay of execution pending appeal dated and filed on February 13, is hereby granted.”
Justice Aneke also clarified the distinction between an administrator and a receiver under the Companies and Allied Matters Act (CAMA) 2020, correcting any impression that the appointment equated to receivership.
He held: “However, before putting my pen down in respect of this suit, I must correct the impression created by the first appointed administrator in processes, as if receivership is synonymous with administration.
“In a receivership, a receiver acts as an agent and is accountable only to the appointing creditor who also bears liability for his default; the receiver realises assets and applies the proceeds to the secured debt and remits any surplus to the company.
“Over time, it became clear that the concept of receiver was deficient as it lacked stakeholder balance and provided no moratorium against other creditors leading to parallel enforcement actions and asset dissipation.
“Realising these economic inefficiencies, CAMA 2020 introduced novel corporate rescue mechanisms modelled after the English administration regime under Part 18 of CAMA 2020, that administration proceedings became a structured statutory mechanism aimed at reviving distressed but viable companies.
“See Section 444 of CAMA 2020, which outlines the key objectives of administration proceedings,” he said.
The case arises from Cenroc’s claim that AMNI failed to pay outstanding debts (reportedly around $15.3 million under contracts dated April 1, 2019), leading to the initial administration order. The stay halts enforcement of that order pending the appeal.
