The Federal High Court in Abuja has formally struck out a request to some aggrieved current or former directors, and shareholders of Seplat Energy, restraining the management of the company from holding its yearly general meeting scheduled for May 10, 2023.
This was contained in a statement released by Seplat Energy announcing the final judgement of the Court, and obtained by EnergyDay on Tuesday.
According to the statement Justice Ahmed Ramat Mohammed, of the Federal High Court, sitting in Abuja in suit number FHC/ABJ/PET/7/2023 Akinnifesi & Adelaja V.Seplat Energy Plc has delivered a final and binding judgement, ordering the Company to hold its AGM on 10th May 2023(judgement).
The judgement further restrains any current or former directors, shareholders and officers of the Company from cancelling or postponing the AGM as announced to the public.
Nigeria’s leading indigenous energy company therefore, states that, in due compliance with the law and the judgement, its AGM will hold on 10th May 2023 at 11 am as expressly ordered by the Federal High Court of Nigeria.
Seplat Energy in the statement further indicated that the announcement of the AGM was made pursuant to Rule 17.10 of the rulebook of the Nigeria Exchange, 2015(Issuer’s Rule).
EnergyDay gathered that the company has been engaged in several court battles including a recent criminal charge brought by the Nigeria Immigration Service (NIS) against Seplat Energy in relation to the immigration status of Mr. Roger Brown and the withdrawal of his immigration visa by the Ministry of Interior.
While the Federal High Court in Abuja had struck out the case, some aggrieved current and former directors and shareholders of the company had written other petitions to the Court restraining the company from holding its Annual General Meeting (AGM).
Basil Omiyi, Board Chairman, Seplat Energy, had in a recent statement said rejected all allegations by all the petitioners against the company.
According to him some of the petitions and allegations are part of an orchestrated attempt to damage the company in response to its efforts to improve corporate governance by eliminating related party transactions and implementing other governance initiatives.
