An indigenous engineering company, Kaztec Engineering Limited has asked the Court of Appeal, Abuja Division to set aside the judgement of Justice Nkeonye Evelyn Maha of Federal High Court Abuja, which struck out it’s suit filed against the Ministry of Petroleum Resources, and five others regarding OMLs 123, 124, 126 and 137.
Justice Maha had in her judgement delivered on Friday, 15th Day of December, 2023, struck out suit number: FHC/ABJ/CS/1291/2020, filed by Kaztec Engineering Limited against the Ministry of Petroleum Resources; the Attorney General of the Federation; Mars Exploration and Production Company Ltd; the Nigerian Upstream Petroleum Regulatory Commission and the Nigerian Petroleum Company Limited (NNPCL).
Dissatisfied, Kaztec Engineering Limited in its Notice of Appeal filed by its team of lawyers, led by Jeph C. Njikonye, SAN is praying the Appellate Court to to allow the appeal and set aside the whole decision striking out the Appellant’s Suit/claims.
The Appellant also urged the court to invoke Sections 15 and 16 Court of Appeal Act and assume jurisdiction to determine the it’s 2nd Amended Originating Summons; and resolve issues 5 endorsed on the it’s Amended Originating Summons filed on 22nd March, 2023 in favour of the Appellant.
The Appellant argued that the trial Court erred in law when it struck out its suit on the ground of non joinder of Salvic Petroleum Resources Ltd, stating that the law is trite that non-joinder of a party does not defeat the cause of action.
Njikonye argued that the joint award of the disputed OMLs to the Appellant and Salvic Petroleum Resources Ltd. was clearly delineated to be on equity participation of Kaztec
He urged the Court to hold that the Appellant (Kaztec) had a distinct cause of action against the Respondents to commence its Suit and to seek the reliefs sought.
Besides, Njikonye argued that the trial Court erred in law when it held that non production of document evidencing payment of signature bonus rendered the Court incompetent to entertain the
He stated that the lower Court had in its rulings affirmed the Appellant’s reasonable cause of action against the Respondents, submitting that the Appellant never sought any reliefs against Salvic Petroleum Resources Limited being not a necessary party for the determination of the Appellant’s Suit.
He urged the Court to hold that “The Appellant had locus standi to commence and maintain the action in its personal capacity, and that the non joinder of Salvic Petroleum Resources Ltd. as a party could not have defeated the Appellant’s cause of action”.
He submitted that the matter submitted to the lower Court was for the interpretation of Section 2(1)(B); 12(1); Paragraph 35 Schedule 1 of the Petroleum Act; Letters of Award of Oil Mining Lease (OMLS) 123, 124, 126 and 137 dated 30th March, 2021, 7 April 2021 and 11th June, 2071 and a determination that the review of the award of the OMLs to the Appellant in the circumstances of the case was wrongful.
He stated that the issue of payment of signature bonus would not arise until the award to the Appellant is restored.
He argued that the competence and jurisdiction of the Court to determine matters in dispute between persons, government or authority is regulated by the Constitution and; relevant statutes.
He submitted that there was nothing in the provisions of the Petroleum Act, any other law or Section 251 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended) that made payment of signature bonus a condition precedent for the Appellant to commence the Suit in the circumstances of the action.
The lower court had issued an interim order directing the parties to the suit (including the Minister of Petroleum Resources and the NUPRC) to maintain the status quo in relation to the said OMLs.
However, in the judgment of the court delivered Friday, the court held that the Originating Summons was incompetent, having failed to join a necessary party (Salvic Petroleum) to the suit. Consequently, the suit was struck out.
In effect, with the striking out of the suit, the order of injunction earlier made in the suit becomes extinguished.
