A group of foreign financial institutions, including Glencore Energy UK Limited, Africa Finance Corporation, Mauritius Commercial Bank, and Fidelity Bank, has launched a lawsuit against FBN Trustees Limited in a major escalation of the ongoing legal disputes influencing Nigeria’s oil and gas industry.

Due to what the international lenders claim is an illegal attempt to take control of Neconde Energy Limited’s holdings in the valuable Oil Mining Lease 42 (OML 42), the case is directed at both FBN Trustees and the designated receiver, Abubakar Sulu-Gambari SAN.

The foreign lenders claim that Abubakar Sulu-Gambari SAN’s appointment as Receiver/Manager violates their rights by being an illegal attempt to enforce a subordinate security.

Context: Neconde and OML 42’s Conflicting Interests

A significant participant in Nigeria’s oil and gas industry, Neconde Energy Limited owns 45% of OML 42, a strategically significant oil asset.

Neconde received credit facilities from overseas lenders, including international financial institutions, an international oil trading company, and Fidelity Bank. FBN Trustees were designated as their security trustees in accordance with the provisions of the agreements.

The complicated network of connections between Neconde, the foreign lenders, and a group of Nigerian banks known as the “Nestoil Lenders” at the root of the conflict.

First Bank Limited and FBN Trustees, a company connected to First Bank Nigeria Limited, served as trustees for these Nestoil lenders.

Claims: Violation of Trust and Illegal Establishment of Security

Allegations that FBN Trustees violated their fiduciary duties and trust obligations by arranging the development of a secondary security interest over Neconde’s assets in OML 42 in order to benefit the Nestoil Lenders are at the center of the complaint.

Despite the foreign lenders’ express lack of consent—a requirement outlined in the original terms of their lending agreement including FBN Trustees—the foreign lenders maintain that this security was constituted through a Deed of Charge executed by FBN Trustees.

Notably, the lawsuit claims that Neconde does not owe the Nestoil Lenders, which makes it entirely illegal to create this extra security without the necessary approval.

Legal Arguments and Demands from Foreign Lenders

The plaintiffs contend that FBN Trustees created the challenged security interest despite being fully aware that previous approval was required and receiving an unequivocal rejection.

They contend that this activity amounts to a grave breach of fiduciary duty and trust, making FBN Trustees liable for acting in the best interests of persons that have no right to claim Neconde’s assets.

In order to invalidate the disputed security, remove FBN Trustees from their position as security trustees, and remove Abubakar Sulu-Gambari SAN as a putative receiver, the foreign lenders are requesting damages and court orders.

They want the court to decide whether the following security and the receiver’s appointment are lawful, as well as to interpret and uphold the priority clauses of the facility agreement, debenture, and intercreditor deed.

The plaintiffs contended in a written letter supporting an originating summons dated December 11, 2025, that the December 2022 Deed of Charge was performed without their agreement and is therefore null and void, invalid, and legally ineffectual.

Consequences: A Novel Development in First Bank Litigation and the Investment Environment

The current legal conflicts between First Bank Nigeria entities, Neconde, and Nestoil are complicated by this development.

Legal experts point out that the accusations of fraudulent security creation and the involvement of several foreign lenders could have significant ramifications.

The case casts doubt on Nigeria’s investment climate and raises significant ethical concerns about the country’s banking system’s transparency and governance.

Opponents caution that if these disagreements are not resolved, they may discourage future foreign investment and harm Nigeria’s financial institutions’ reputations.

Conclusion: Next Actions and Industry Monitoring

Stakeholders from the banking and oil industries are keeping a close eye on the court’s decision as it evaluates the claims of the foreign lenders.