ABM Resources Limited had in a bid to recover the money owed her by SEPLAT Petroleum Development Company Plc for materials supplied to the oil prospecting company, had in 2016 through her counsel, Mr Ade Oyebanji, (SAN), instituted a debt recovery suit at the Lagos State High Court Ikeja.
By Jude-Ken Ojinnaka
SEPLAT Petroleum Development Company Plc, a foremost oil and gas exploration company in Nigeria has appealed against the judgement of the Ikeja High Court, Lagos, ordering it to pay outstanding debt of $2,112,500.00 (N1,499,875,000 .00) to an oil servicing company, ABM Global Resources Limited.
According to the Notice of Appeal filed by the legal firm of Olaniwun Ajayi LP, the appellant in the notice of appeal raised ten grounds for adjudication.
However, no date has been fixed for hearing of the appeal.
Justice Owolabi A. Dabiri of a Lagos State High Court, Ikeja division had ordered SEPLAT Petroleum Development Company Plc, a foremost oil and gas exploration company in Nigeria, to pay its outstanding indebtedness of $2,112,500.00 (N1,499,875,000 .00) to an oil servicing company, ABM Global Resources Limited.
Justice Dabiri gave the order while delivering judgement in a debt recovery suit filed by ABM Global Resources Limited against SEPLAT Petroleum Development Company Plc in suit number LD/2457GCMW/2016
ABM Resources Limited had in a bid to recover the money owed her by SEPLAT Petroleum Development Company Plc for materials supplied to the oil prospecting company, had in 2016 through her counsel, Mr Ade Oyebanji, (SAN), instituted a debt recovery suit at the Lagos State High Court Ikeja.
In the amended statement of claim dated November 23, 2020 and filed by Mr Ade Oyebanji (SAN), on behalf of ABM Global Resources Limited, the claimant averred that sometimes between 2012 and 2014, SEPLAT Petroleum Development Company Plc secured her service to supply 9-5/8 N80 VAM Top Casing Pipes and 2-7/8 N80 HCS Tubing within the space of 3years.
READ ALSO
SERAP drags Buhari to court over refusal to meet ASUU’s demands
ABM added that it supplied the defendant (SEPLAT) with all the numbers of 2-7/8 N80 HCS Tubing Pipes which were received by the defendant.
Claimant further averred that in fulfilment of the terms of contract for the supply of the materials and in adherence to the purchase order of the defendant , it made several supplies.
In fulfilling part of its obligations in accordance with the contract term , Claimant said SEPLAT made an upfront payment of $3,640,000.00 being 80% of the total cost of the 50,000 feet of 9-5/8 N80 VAM Top Casing Pipes supplied leaving a balance sum of $910,000.00 and $227,500.00 as Value Added Tax totaling $1,137,500.00.
The oil servicing company claimed it supplied the products requested by the defendant satisfactorily through its Purchase Order number 013537 and the defendant issued a Work Completion Certificate for the job.
ABM stated that it issued invoice number ABM /MD/ SEPLAT/14/Vol. 4/892 dated November 17, 2014 to the defendant in respect of the balance sum of $1,137,500.00 due on the supply, but the defendant has refused to settle the outstanding invoice.
It was further stated by the claimant that the defendant also requested for the supply of 120,000 feet of 2-7/8 N80 HCS pipes and made an upfront payment of $3,120,000.00 being 80% of the total cost of the 120,000 feet of 2-7/8 N80 HCS Pipe in accordance with the terms of contract, leaving a balance sum of $780,000.00 and $195,000.00. ( Value Added Tax) , totaling $975,000.
The plaintiff averred that all the said goods were supplied, with SEPLAT issuing a Work Completion Certificate, but that the defendant has refused to settle the outstanding debt despite repeated demands, hence the resort to litigation.
Consequently, the plaintiff is claiming from the defendant the sum of $1,137,500.00 and another $ 975,000.00 being cost of the unpaid materials supplied to the defendant.
However, during trial both parties call one witness each and tendered documentary evidence in support of their case.
While evaluating the documentary evidence before the court and counsel submissions, the trial judge said that according to defence own documents and oral testimony, there was no dispute that the defendant issued Work Completion Certificate to the claimant after delivery of materials which pre- supposes the satisfactory completion of certain job or activities.
The judge added that the sanctity of contract or agreement is to ensure that a party who voluntarily entered into a contract is bound by it, no matter how unfavourable it may turn out to be as long as he entered into the contract fully conscious of what he was doing and had willingly signed same and the subject matter of the contract is lawful.
On the issue of shortfall of 17, 842.02 feet of pipes as alleged by the defendant, Justice Dabiri said the defendant conducted an in-house reconciliation exercise and came up with a shortfall in the specifications of the items supplied to it by the claimant in 2012 . The claimant rejected the reconciliation exercise, and rightly so, a reconciliation exercise conducted without the active participation of the other party in dispute is one sided.
He added that to say the least, there was no sufficient materials placed before the court to prove that there was any shortfall in the supply.
” The court was not furnished with any official report detailing the shortage , rather an internal memo was tendered before the court, a communication between departments within the same organisation.
” The defendant could have been more circumspect and more discerning to invite the claimant for the verification and both parties to acknowledge, consent or reject, but this is a one man show considering the colossal amount involved.
Justice Dabiri in the judgement said:
” I have listened to the submissions of counsel on both sides, and having perused the array of processes and documents before me, the court hereby make the following orders and this is the judgement of the court”.
” That the claimant is entitle to the unpaid and outstanding balance sum of $1, 137,500.00 for the supply of 9-5/8 N80 VAM Top Casing Pipes and 9-5/8 HCS Tubing Pipes
“That the sum of $1,137,500.00 is the sum due to the claimant from the outstanding balance of the defendant for the supply of 9-5 N80 VAM Top Casing Pipe and 9-5N80 HCS Tubing Pipe.
” The payment of interest on the said sum of $1,137,500.00 from the 18th of February, 2014 at the rate of 6% per annum until judgement is delivered and thereafter at the rate of 6% per annum until full liquidation.
” That the claimant is entitled to to the unpaid outstanding balance of $975,000.00 due for the supply of 2-7/8 N80 HCS Pipe.
” The sum of $975,000 .00 only is the sum due to the claimant for the supply of 2-7/8 N80 HCS Pipe and payment of interest on the said sum of $975, 000.00 from the 18th of February , 2014 at the rate of 10% per annum until judgement is delivered and thereafter at the rate of 6% per annum until full liquidation.
Justice Dabiri also awarded N500,000 in favour of the claimant.