Court Proceedings Halted As Two SANs Claim To Represent General Hydrocarbons

Proceedings in a suit filed by General Hydrocarbons Limited (GHL) against the Asset Management Corporation of Nigeria (AMCON) and others were stalled on Wednesday after two Senior Advocates of Nigeria announced separate appearances for the company before Justice Ambrose Lewis-Allagoa of the Federal High Court, Lagos.

The confusion in Suit No. FHC/L/CS/1903/2025 began when Dr. Abiodun Layonu, SAN, and Mr. Oluseye Opasanya, SAN, each claimed to represent the claimant.
Dr. Layonu informed the court that he appeared for General Hydrocarbons Limited. But Opasanya, appointed by AMCON as Receiver/Manager over the company, countered that only he could lawfully represent the claimant since GHL had been placed under receivership before the suit was initiated—an essential fact he said was not disclosed to the court.

The conflicting claims triggered lengthy arguments on who is legally authorised to speak for the company. Justice Lewis-Allagoa repeatedly pressed both lawyers to identify GHL’s authentic representative in light of the pending receivership.

With no resolution reached, the court directed both counsel to file written addresses on the issue of legal representation and adjourned the matter to December 3, 2025.

The dispute also stalled contempt proceedings earlier initiated by GHL against AMCON. The contempt application stemmed from interim orders restraining AMCON and its agents from undertaking any recovery steps, interfering with GHL’s assets, or appointing a receiver pending the hearing of a substantive motion.

At the heart of the suit are Oil Mining Leases (OMLs) 120 and 121, assets tied to efforts to recover a substantial non-performing loan issued by First Bank of Nigeria to Atlantic Energy Drilling Concept Limited.
To safeguard repayment of the debt—referred to as Outstanding Exposure—the former Department of Petroleum Resources (now NUPRC) considered allowing a qualified operator to manage the assets and channel production revenue toward liquidation of the loan.

GHL subsequently proposed to operate the assets under a Tripartite Agreement with First Bank and AMCON. The agreement recorded GHL’s commitment to advancing Nigeria’s economic interests while resolving the Outstanding Exposure. On that basis, GHL undertook financial obligations and received institutional support.

However, First Bank and AMCON later accused GHL’s former management of serious operational and financial misconduct, including revenue diversion, persistent non-payment of contractors, operational deterioration, and an imminent risk of FPSO demobilisation—factors said to endanger the assets and expose them to possible licence revocation.

Citing sections 34 and 48 of the AMCON Act, AMCON appointed a Receiver over GHL on September 18, 2025. That appointment, by law, suspended the powers of the company’s former directors from that date.

Despite this, the former directors allegedly filed the present suit in the company’s name, which AMCON argues amounts to an unlawful attempt to obstruct the receivership. Since assuming control, the Receiver has taken steps to stabilise operations and protect the assets.

Instead of recognising the receivership, AMCON contends that the former directors are now attempting to weaponise interim court orders obtained after the Receiver’s appointment—mischaracterising a statutory restructuring measure as contempt in a bid to undermine the Receiver and his legal team.