A consortium of international lenders—Glencore Energy UK Limited, Africa Finance Corporation (AFC), Mauritius Commercial Bank, and Fidelity Bank—has instituted legal action against FBN Trustees Limited and a court-appointed receiver, Abubakar Sulu-Gambari, SAN, over what they describe as an unlawful attempt to take over Neconde Energy Limited’s interests in Oil Mining Lease 42 (OML 42).
The lawsuit marks a major escalation in the series of disputes surrounding control and financing of one of Nigeria’s strategic oil assets. The plaintiffs allege that the appointment of Sulu-Gambari as Receiver/Manager represents an improper enforcement of a subordinate security, carried out in breach of their rights as senior lenders.
Dispute Over Neconde’s OML 42 Interests
Neconde Energy Limited holds a 45 per cent participating interest in OML 42, a producing oil block regarded as strategically significant within Nigeria’s oil and gas sector.
According to court filings, the foreign lenders had previously extended credit facilities to Neconde, with FBN Trustees appointed as security trustee under the agreed financing structure. The dispute, however, centres on what the lenders describe as a complex and improper arrangement involving Neconde, FBN Trustees, and a group of Nigerian banks collectively referred to as the “Nestoil Lenders”.
The Nestoil Lenders include First Bank Limited and FBN Trustees, which is affiliated with First Bank Nigeria Limited and also serves as trustee for that lending group.
Allegations Of Breach Of Trust
The plaintiffs accuse FBN Trustees of breaching its fiduciary duties by facilitating the creation of a secondary security interest over Neconde’s OML 42 assets in favour of the Nestoil Lenders.
They contend that this additional security was created through a Deed of Charge executed in December 2022 without their consent, despite explicit provisions in the lending agreements requiring such approval.
The foreign lenders further assert that Neconde does not owe any outstanding debt to the Nestoil Lenders, arguing that the creation of the security interest was therefore “completely unlawful” and without legal foundation.
Legal Demands Before The Court
In their originating summons dated December 11, 2025, the plaintiffs argue that FBN Trustees acted despite receiving a clear refusal from them to create any secondary security.
They claim the conduct amounts to a serious breach of trust and fiduciary responsibility, alleging that FBN Trustees prioritised the interests of parties with no legitimate claim over Neconde’s assets.
Among other reliefs, the lenders are asking the court to:
- Declare the December 2022 Deed of Charge void and legally ineffective
- Invalidate the contested security over OML 42
- Remove FBN Trustees as security trustee
- Set aside the appointment of Abubakar Sulu-Gambari, SAN, as receiver
They are also seeking judicial interpretation and enforcement of the priority provisions contained in the facility agreement, debenture, and intercreditor deed governing the original financing structure.
Wider Implications For Banking And Investment
The case adds another layer to ongoing litigation involving First Bank-related entities, Neconde, and Nestoil, and has drawn close attention from industry observers.
Legal analysts say the involvement of multiple international lenders and allegations of unlawful security creation raise broader concerns about governance, transparency, and creditor protection within Nigeria’s banking and oil sectors.
Some analysts warn that unresolved disputes of this nature could undermine investor confidence and negatively affect Nigeria’s attractiveness to foreign capital, particularly in capital-intensive sectors such as oil and gas.
What Comes Next
As proceedings continue, stakeholders across the financial and energy industries are watching closely, with the outcome expected to have significant implications for secured lending practices, trusteeship obligations, and asset control in Nigeria’s oil and gas industry.
