A Federal High Court in Lagos on Thursday, granted an order for stay of execution of judgment in a suit by Cenroc FPSO Solutions Nigeria Ltd, against AMNI International Petroleum Development Company Ltd.
Justice Chukwujekwu Aneke granted the order while delivering ruling on a motion for stay of execution of an order of the court delivered on Feb. 13, in the suit labelled: FHC/L/L/C$/1454/2025.
Recall that the plaintiff’s action against the defendant stems from underlying commercial relationship and contractual engagements with AMNI.
The plaintiff had approached the court through an administration application filed on July 23, 2025, seeking, among other reliefs, a declaration that AMNI had become unable to pay its outstanding debt to the company.
It had also asked the court for an order, appointing one Mr Sam Aiboni as administrator over affairs of the defendant.
On Feb. 13, Justice Aneke had granted the reliefs sought by the plaintiff, and had consequently, appointed Sam Aiboni, as Administrator of the company.
Dissatisfied with the judgement and order appointing the administrator, the respondent filed an appeal, challenging the judgment and the order appointing the administrator.
The respondent also asked for a stay of execution of the judgment, pending determination of the appeal.
Ex-AGF Adoke extends winning streak as Court dismisses N100m libel suit over OPL 245
Delivering his ruling on the application on Thursday, Justice Aneke held that the judgement/debtor had made out a case, warranting a grant of stay of execution.
The court held inter alia:
“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 Feb. 13, 2026 and I so hold,” he said
Meanwhile, Justice Aneke drew a distinction between an administrator and a receiver under the provisions of the Company and Allied Matters Act (CAMA) 2020, Indicating that in the instant suit, the court’s order was for an administrator and not a receiver.
Aneke 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 asset and applies the proceeds to the secured debt and remit’s any surplus to the company.
“Overtime, it became clear that the concept of receiver was deficient as it lacked stakeholder balance and provided no monitarium against other creditors leading to parallel enforcement actions and assets dis-stations.
“Realising this economic inefficiencies, CAMA 2020 introduced novel corporate rescue mechanisms modelled after the English administration regime under part 18 of CAMA 2020, that administration proceeding became a structural statutory mechanism, aimed at reviving distress but viable companies;.
“See section 444 of CAMA 2020, which outlines the key objectives of an administration proceedings,” he said.
Consequently, the court held: “The judgment/debtor application for stay of execution pending appeal dated and filed on Feb. 13, is hereby granted,”
(NAN)
Stay ahead with the latest updates! Join The ConclaveNG on WhatsApp and Telegram for real-time news alerts, breaking stories, and exclusive content delivered straight to your phone. Don’t miss a headline — subscribe now!
