Unlawful Retirement: Mobil Appeals Order to Deposit $4.2m as Security 

Alex Enumah in Abuja

Mobil Producing Nigeria Unlimited has appealed the ruling of the National Industrial Court ordering it to deposit the sum of $4.2 million as security in an alleged unlawful retirement suit.

A former employee of ExxonMobil, Mr. James Nwagbogwu Ebede, had dragged the oil giant before the National Industrial Court in Lagos in January 2018, challenging what he claimed to be wrongful termination of his appointment.

While faulting the claim of Ebede, Mobil on November 19, 2020 obtained a stay of proceedings at the industrial court pending the hearing of its appeal at the Court of Appeal, Lagos.

However, the lower court on January 27, 2022 set aside the stay and order for hearing of the case of the claimant.

While the claimant on March 14 amended his statement of facts he on May 9, filed a motion praying the industrial court for an order directing the defendants to “furnish sufficient security in the sun of $4.2 million to satisfy any decree judgment that may be made against the defendants”.

The claimant had predicated his action on the allegations that the defendants are divesting their assets in Nigeria.

Delivering ruling in the application on August 15, 2022, Justice R. H. Gwandu, ordered Mobil to furnish an account of its choice that contains the said amount to serve as security in the event that judgment was entered against it.

Dissatisfied, Mobil Producing Nigeria Unlimited and ExxonMobil Corporation, which are the sole defendants in the first suit have approached the appellate court to set aside the order of the lower court for being “Unknown to our law and legal system”.

The appellant in the appeal marked CA/LAG/PRE/ROA/CV/975M1/2022, is claiming the lower court erred in law, “when it granted the application despite lack of any credible evidence in support of his (claimant) that the appellant was divesting its asset”.

In the appeal predicated on four grounds, the appellant further submitted that the lower court misdirected itself when it granted the application despite stating that it did not see how the claimant arrived at the sum of $4.2 million.

Justice Gwandu had held “that from the cursory look at the amended claims is way more than what he claimed against the defendants. I did not see why I should grant the application in like sum, the order of the court is that the 2nd defendant should only furnish any of its account with sufficient funds to cover the sum as claimed”.

It is the case of the defendant that the judgment of the lower court leaves parties in a state of “confusion as to the amount which the appellant was ordered to provide security for, adding that the order further provided “ample ambiguity when it ordered the appellant to furnish an account in any name with enough funds to offset the judgment of the court should the claimant’s claim succeed.”

Counsel to the defendant, Gboyega Oyewole, who filed the appeal dated October 26, 2022, therefore urged the court to allow the appeal and make an order setting aside the ruling of Justice Gwandu delivered on August 15, 2022.

Meanwhile in another application dated October 26, appellants are asking the appellate court for an order setting aside the Form 48 dated October 20, seeking the committal to prison of six officials of Mobil over alleged failure to comply with the order of the court to provide to provide fund in any account that would offset the judgment sum in the event the claimant’s claim succeed.

Recall that the court had while making the order also directed the defendant to sign an affidavit of compliance within two weeks and a lien placed on the account to prevent the funds from being dissipated.

Justice Gwandu had held that the said funds shall revert back to the defendant if the case of the claimant failed.

However, the claimant in a fresh application dated October 19, sought for the imprisonment of six of Mobil officials for allegedly disobeying the order of the lower court.

Challenging the issuance of form 48 against the six officials: Mr Richard Liang, Alexander Savva, Olusegun Banwo, Dozie Adesuwa, Aliyu Bala and Adelabu Adedoyin, the defendant argued that the lower court lacked jurisdiction to entertain contempt proceedings against the alleged contemptnor.

According to the defendant monetary claim cannot be enforced by issuing form 48, adding that the alleged contemptnor are persons who are not parties to the suit filed by Ebede.

The appellant accordingly asked the appellate court to set aside the Form 48 served on the alleged contemptnor as well as the entire committal proceedings for want of jurisdiction.

While Mobil maintains that Ebede resigned voluntarily from the company and has his letter of resignation pleaded before the court, it further submitted that it is not divesting or selling its assets in Nigeria, and that Ebede did not provide the Court with any evidence of his allegations against Mobil to justify the grant of the application by the court.