Judge: My Order Restraining AMCON over GHL Subsists, Bars AMCON Appointed Lawyer from GHL

Alex Enumah in Abuja

Justice Ambrose Lewis-Allagoa of the Federal High Court in Lagos, yesterday, stopped a senior lawyer, Oluseye Opasanya, SAN, from appearing as counsel for General Hydrocarbons Limited (GHL) in a suit between the oil firm, Asset Management Corporation of Nigeria (AMCON) and three others.

Justice Lewis-Allagoa based his decision on the grounds that Opasanya’s purported appointment by AMCON-appointed Receiver/Manager, Seyi Akinwunmi, was improper and in violation of a subsisting court order.

The court had on September 23, 2025 granted an order restraining the defendants from acting or taking any steps or continuing with any steps or enforcing any rights against the applicant pending the outcome of the Motion on Notice.

Justice Lewis-Allagoa observed that Mr. Bidemi Ademola-Bello, SAN, who represented the defendants at the September 23 court sitting equally undertook to abide by the decision of the court.

But the very next day after his undertaking, he instituted another action (Suit 2159), before Justice Aluko, of the same Federal High Court, Lagos, in violation of the valid order of the court (in the name of the claimant in purported receivership) and suppressed relevant key information before Justice Aluko.

Lewis-Allagoa noted that Aluko without being informed of the proceedings before his court (Lewis-Allagoa) granted orders sought by the purported receiver.

While frowning at the appointment of Opasanya, Justice Lewis-Allagoa stressed that the position of the law was very clear, which was that a subsisting order of the court of competent jurisdiction must not be disobeyed and continues to subsist until otherwise determined.

Meanwhile, the judge approved Dr Abiodun Layonu, SAN, as the legitimate lawyer representing General Hydrocarbons Limited in the case.

At the previous proceedings both Layonu and Opasanya had announced their appearance on behalf of the plaintiff, a situation that led the court to ask them to address the issue.

In his submissions, Layonu informed the judge that he remained the official counsel for GHL, having complied with court directives by submitting an application and affidavit on December 3, 2025.

He asked the court to confirm his status as the company’s proper representative, arguing that AMCON’s purported appointment of a Receiver/Manager violated existing court orders.

However, Opasanya submitted that AMCON appointed a Receiver/Manager on September 18, 2025, and that he had tendered his appointment document in an affidavit dated December 2, 2025.

He explained that once a Receiver was appointed, the company’s directors would lose their authority—including the power to appoint legal counsel—and any lawyer acting on their instructions no longer has authority.

He failed to disclose that AMCON was barred by the Federal High Court from continuing with any such appointment until the determination of the case.

However, in his ruling, yesterday, Lewis-Allagoa held that Opasanya’s appointment was improper, but that Layonu’s authority was backed by a letter of instruction dated September 17, 2025, and that he had initiated the case and appeared regularly in court.

The judge also found that after reviewing the instruction evidence from both lawyers, Layonu possessed a letter from GHL dated September 17, 2025, while Opasanya had a letter from Seyi Akinwunmi, the alleged receiver appointed by AMCON, dated November 14, 2025.

The Court further stated that Layonu had been instructed by GHL, initiated and signed the suit’s originating processes, and had consistently appeared in court.

Conversely, Opasanya’s instruction came nearly two months after a court order prohibited further actions by any receiver.

The Court emphasised that court orders must be obeyed until they were formally overturned, and that Opasanya’s appointment, having failed to follow the proper procedure, constituted a violation of existing court orders.

The court also addressed the issue of conflict of interest raised by Layonu, who argued that Opasanya was actually AMCON’s lawyer and could not represent GHL in a suit against AMCON.

After referring to minutes from a July 2025 settlement meeting involving AMCON, GHL, and First Bank of Nigeria Limited, where Opasanya represented AMCON and had acted on its behalf in similar matters, the judge took a position.

He held that, “The minutes, which were prepared by his law firm, Messrs. Olaniwun Ajayi LP, on their letterhead, confirmed his instructions to represent AMCON. Opasanya did not dispute this, and the court deemed the allegation accepted as true.

“Since Opasanya’s law firm also represents the defendant in this case, the court found it in the interest of justice to prevent him from representing both sides,” the judge held.

Consequently, the court dismissed Opasanya’s appearance as GHL’s counsel, along with any other lawyer appointed by Seyi Akinwunmi in breach of court orders.

The case was adjourned to January 30, 2026, for the hearing of all pending applications.