The Federal High Court Lagos has ordered interim administration for Green Energy International Limited and Lekoil Oil & Gas Investments Limited following their alleged failure to repay a $25.5 million debt to a joint venture partner.
Presiding judge, Ambrose Allagoa, granted the order after hearing an ex-parte application filed by H-PTP Energy Services Limited, which sought restraining, Mareva, and injunctive reliefs against the two companies.
As part of the ruling, the court appointed Chimezie Ihekweazu (SAN), an accredited insolvency practitioner, as interim administrator to oversee the affairs of both firms pending the determination of the substantive suit.
Justice Allagoa directed that the administrator assume full managerial control and perform all statutory functions associated with the role, except the distribution of the companies’ assets.
The interim arrangement, the court held, will remain in effect until the main case is heard and decided.
In a further order aimed at preserving the companies’ financial assets, the judge instructed all banks and financial institutions regulated by the Central Bank of Nigeria to ensure that the accounts of the respondents are placed under the control of the administrator or his nominee.
Court documents show that H-PTP Energy Services alleged that the respondent firms, as joint venture partners in the Okatikpa Field under Petroleum Mining Lease 11 located in Andoni, Rivers State, have been indebted to it since mid-2025.
The applicant maintained that the companies acknowledged the debt in writing but failed to liquidate the obligation despite repeated demands and formal notices.
It further alleged that the respondents had recently become evasive and were attempting to dispute the already-agreed liability, raising concerns about the security of recoverable funds.
To safeguard its interests, H-PTP Energy Services told the court it attached the bank accounts, receivables, and crude oil stock belonging to the respondents and produced from the Okatikpa Field as part of its application.
Legal observers note that Mareva injunctions commonly referred to as asset-freezing orders are typically granted to prevent defendants from dissipating assets before the resolution of a dispute.
The court subsequently adjourned the case to February 26 for the hearing of the substantive motion, where the parties are expected to present detailed arguments on the debt claim and related obligations.
The ruling introduces heightened regulatory and operational scrutiny for the affected firms and underscores the judiciary’s readiness to deploy insolvency measures to protect creditors while ensuring that corporate disputes are resolved within the framework of the law.
