In an alleged deprivation in crude oil shipment brought by the Federal Government against Shell Western Supply & Trading Limited, a Federal High Court, Lagos, will on June 6 resume trial in the suit before Justice Mojisola Olatoregun.
According to report, the trial was stalled on Tuesday following absence of the judge said to be on another official assignment.
Shell Petroleum Development Company and its subsidiary, Shell Western Supply & Trading, are defendants in the suit the Federal Government is claiming $406.7 million, said to be for crude oil lifted by the defendants in 2013 and 2014 as shortfall of money paid by them into government account.
The government said the Anglo-Dutch company did not publicly or under-declared crude oil shipments during the period while also stating that forensic analysis of bills of laden and shipping documents showed that Shell cheated Nigeria with regard to the revenue.
According to the government, professionals tracked global movement of Nigeria’s hydro-carbons, including crude oil and gas, and identified the companies engaged in practices that led to missing revenues from crude oil sales and gas export to different parts of the world.
The Federal Government said the tracking also revealed discrepancies in the export records from Nigeria with the import records at US ports. It averred that the undeclared shipments from January 2013 to December 2014 brought the total value of the entire shortfall to $406.75 million.
Federal Government also alleged that the defendants failed to respond to its letter seeking clarification as regards the alleged discrepancies.
In another court related case, people of Nembe-Bassambiri in Bayelsa State on Tuesday urged the Federal High Court, Yenagoa, to halt the renewal of lease for OML 29 to Aiteo pending the outcome of a substantive suit before the court.
The development is sequel to plans by the Minister of Petroleum Resources to renew the lease of OML 29 oil bloc to Aiteo for $82 million without regard to the position of the community in Suit No. FHC/YNG/CS/62/2015.
In an 18-paragraph motion on notice, the plaintiffs who are representing OML 29 host communities in their application sought an order restraining the Minister of Petroleum Resources from granting any application for the renewal of OML 29 “beyond the subsisting 30-year term.
“The lease on OML 29 will expire on June 30, 2019, and the Nembe communities want the pending hearing and determination of the substantive suit before the lease is renewed”.
“They also averred that without allowing the court to decide on the interlocutory injunction, the 5th Defendant went ahead to make payments to the 2nd Defendant through the Department of Petroleum Resources”.
“The $82 million payment was made in five tranches of $18,455,000, $9,277,500, $9,277,500, $6,866,468.23, $20 million and $18,230,000″.
“The payments were made on 22nd January, 2018, 22nd January 2018, 6th November, 2018, 14th November, 2018, 18th December, 2018 and 22nd January, 2019, respectively.
“The conduct of the 5th Defendant/Respondent in ignoring the suit to make payments for the renewal of the OML 29 is capable of generating unprecedented violence in our Kingdom within the OML 29 acreage,” the representatives of the community said.
At the resumed hearing in Court 2, Federal High Court, Yenagoa, the trial Justice, Awogboro Abimbola, fixed April 11 for hearing on the motion on notice, while urging both parties to make more efforts in ongoing settlement moves.
Abimbola asked both parties to inform the court of any progress made on the settlement efforts at the next adjourned date.
Earlier, lead counsel for the plaintiffs, Iniruo Wills, told the court that by proceeding to renew the lease, the 2nd and 5th defendants were sending a dangerous and disturbing signal to both the court and the host community.
Wills informed the court that the host community was having a hard time restraining the youth from taking the law into their hands in the wake of the reported payment of $82 million by Aiteo to the Department of Petroleum Resources for the renewal of OML 29.
He described the development as an affront to the court in view of efforts to settle the substantive suit before the court, and had therefore filed a motion to set aside all the steps taken to renew the lease, while urging the court to proceed on the motion on notice.
Counsel to the Minister of Petroleum Resources, S. Soberekon, however, pleaded for time as the motion was served on her client that very morning.
