Petrocam Seeks Relief as Court Defers Decision on ₦9bn Account Freeze Case
Lagos Court Delays Ruling on Petrocam’s Bid to Lift Account Freeze
A Federal High Court in Lagos has adjourned ruling until April 30, 2026, on an application by Petrocam Trading Nigeria Limited seeking to lift an interim order freezing its bank accounts over an alleged ₦9.05 billion debt claimed by a commercial bank.
/ You Might Also Like /
Dispute Centres on Alleged ₦9bn Debt
The case arises from a dispute between Petrocam and a commercial bank over an alleged outstanding debt tied to a credit facility. The court had earlier granted an interim freezing order following an ex parte application by the bank to preserve funds allegedly owed as of May 2025.
The order restricts the company and its principal from accessing funds pending determination of the suit, effectively limiting financial operations.
Petrocam Challenges Legality of Freeze Order
Petrocam, through its legal counsel, has urged the court to discharge the order, arguing that it was obtained through the suppression of material facts and has severely disrupted its operations.
The company maintains that it is not indebted to the bank, asserting that all obligations under the facility have been fully settled. It claims that over ₦7.4 billion in petroleum sales proceeds were remitted directly to the bank and supported by transaction records involving major industry counterparties.
Petrocam also cited a Letter of Non-Indebtedness allegedly issued in December 2024, which it says contradicts the bank’s current claim of a ₦9 billion liability.
Disagreements Over Subsidy-Linked Financing Structure
A key element of the dispute relates to the structure of the original financing arrangement, which was linked to Nigeria’s fuel subsidy regime. Petrocam argues that repayments were tied to petroleum sales and sovereign debt instruments, with any delays arising from government payment timelines.
The company further alleges that interest obligations tied to the facility were waived in line with regulatory directives, accusing the bank of continuing to impose charges beyond agreed terms.
Bank Defends Freezing Order
Counsel to the bank opposed the application, arguing that the alleged indebtedness remains valid and that the issues raised by Petrocam should be resolved during trial rather than at the interim stage.
The bank maintains that the freezing order is necessary to preserve the subject matter of the case and prevent potential dissipation of funds before final determination.
Broader Legal and Financial Implications
The case highlights the legal complexities surrounding debt enforcement, particularly in Nigeria’s oil and gas financing space where transactions often involve subsidy-linked structures and multiple counterparties.
For financial institutions, the use of interim freezing orders remains a critical tool in debt recovery. However, such measures can significantly impact business continuity for affected firms, especially those operating in capital-intensive sectors like petroleum trading.
Outlook
With the ruling now adjourned to April 30, 2026, the case will be closely watched by stakeholders in the banking and energy sectors.
The court’s decision will likely shape the balance between creditor protection and corporate operational continuity, particularly in disputes involving large-scale financing arrangements and contested liabilities.
READ MORE
