Seplat Energy Plc. (SEPL) has sued its former chairman, A.B.C. Orjiako and a firm, Amaze Limited, at the Federal High Court Abuja, claiming N5 billion damages.

The claimant, in the suit marked FHC/ABJ/CS/386/2023, filed on its behalf by Matthew Burkaa (SAN) on Tuesday, said it seeks the damages owing to false representation committed against it by the defendants.

It is, among others, asking the court to declare the use of its official letterhead by Orjiako to make an offer in the sum of $300 million, without recourse to the Board, a clear breach of the terms of their subsisting consulting agreement and a breach of the Companies and Allied Matter Act (CAMA) 2020.

It also asks the court to declare Orjiako’s signing off the letter by designating himself as ‘Pioneer Chairman’ as an unknown designation intended to deceive the audience and gain unmerited pecuniary benefits.

The claimant also requested the court to grant an order of perpetual injunction, restraining the defendants from representing or committing Seplat Energy any further without proper written approval of the Board.

It also prayed the court to set aside all unilateral actions taken by the 1st and 2nd defendants without the express approval of the Board of Directors of the claimant.

The applicant prayed: “An order restraining the 1st and 2nd defendants from carrying out in the name of the plaintiff any action and/or making any representation or committing the plaintiff without the express approval of the Board of Directors of the plaintiff first formally sought and obtained.

“An order, setting aside all unilateral actions taken by the 1st and 2nd defendants without express approval of the Board of Directors of the plaintiff.

“A perpetual injunction restraining the 1st defendant from using the letterhead of the plaintiff in making any representation on behalf of the plaintiff or committing the plaintiff to any transaction or deal without the express and formal approval of the plaintiff via its Board of Directors.

“Damages in the sum of N5 billion only against the 1st and 2nd defendants jointly and severally for deceit and false representation against the plaintiff.” (The Guardian)

Update news