In a ruling with significant implications for oil spill litigation in Nigeria, the Federal High Court sitting in Uyo has dismissed a ₦50 billion claim brought against ExxonMobil (sued as Mobil Producing Nigeria Unlimited, now Seplat Energy Producing) by the Ejige Ore Njenyisi Muma & Fishing Co-operative Society Ltd. The decision, delivered by Honourable Justice Onyetenu, reaffirms the supremacy of the Oil Pipelines Act over common-law tort claims in matters arising from alleged hydrocarbon releases.
The Court was persuaded by the submissions of Chinonso Ekuma, Esq. of KENNA LP, counsel to ExxonMobil, who successfully argued that the Plaintiff failed to disclose any legally recognisable violation of rights by the Defendant.
In its findings, the Court held that the Plaintiff did not establish any actionable legal infraction. Crucially, the Joint Investigation Visit (JIV) Report, tendered by the Plaintiff itself, showed that the alleged incident of 12 September 2021 was confined to ExxonMobil’s operational facility and did not adversely affect the members of the Co-operative Society or their means of livelihood.
READ ALSO: Court Dismisses Ufoma Joseph Immanuel’s Bail Application Over Alleged $1.5m Fraud
However, the most significant aspect of the ruling was the Court’s determination on Section 11(5) of the Oil Pipelines Act, which mandates that claims of this nature be pursued exclusively under the statutory compensation regime. The Court found that the Plaintiff’s attempt to frame the action under common-law principles of negligence and nuisance was incompetent, leading to a dismissal of the suit for lack of jurisdiction.
The ruling carries important implications for the energy industry. First, it underscores that claimants cannot bypass the statutory compensation framework under the Oil Pipelines Act by recasting claims as negligence or nuisance. Second, it highlights the evidential significance of Joint Investigation Visit Reports, particularly where such reports demonstrate the absence of adverse impact on claimants. Third, it reinforces that failure to comply with Section 11(5) of the Act is fatal, as it deprives the Court of jurisdiction. More so, analysts view the Ruling as a judicial affirmation of compensation claim procedure under the Act, with far-reaching implications for oil spill litigation in Nigeria.
The ruling brings clarity for operators in reinforcing the procedure laid down in Section 11(5) of the Act and the need to act within its scope in suits of this nature. For the Nigerian energy sector, the ruling reinforces the sanctity of the procedure laid down in Section 11(5) of the Oil Pipelines Act. The plaintiff’s Counsel was K. O. Uzuokwu, Esq, and the Defendant’s Counsel was KENNA LP’s Chinonso Ekuma, Esq.
Analysts view the Ruling as a judicial affirmation of compensation claim procedure under the Act, with far-reaching implications for oil spill litigation in Nigeria.
