Court has dismissed Aiteo’s Preliminary Objection in Opu Nembe Oil Spill Lawsuit and adjourned case to April 16.
NewsOnline Nigeria reports that a Federal High Court sitting in Yenagoa on Tuesday dismissed a preliminary objection filed by Aiteo Group in a lawsuit instituted by the Opu Nembe Kingdom over alleged oil spills that reportedly affected the community.
The oil company had challenged the suit on the grounds that the plaintiffs incorrectly identified it as Aiteo Eastern Exploration and Production Company Ltd. in their court documents.
ALSO: CBN Affirms Capitalisation of Alpha Morgan Bank, Strengthening Growth and Nationwide Expansion
In its preliminary objection, Aiteo argued that its proper corporate name is Aiteo Eastern E & P Company Ltd., insisting that the alleged misidentification rendered the suit defective.
However, delivering his ruling, Justice Emmanuel Ayo dismissed the objection, holding that the court would not allow technical issues to obstruct the substantive issues raised in the case.
The judge noted that the plaintiffs had already filed a motion seeking to regularise the name of the defendant, further strengthening the court’s decision to reject the preliminary objection.
Justice Ayo subsequently adjourned the matter to April 16 for a ruling on the motion seeking to amend the defendant’s name in the suit.
In the case marked FHC/YN/CS/284/2024, the Opu Nembe Kingdom is asking the court to declare that the massive oil spills affecting the community were caused by operational failure and negligence on the part of the oil company.
The community is also seeking legal redress over the environmental and economic impact of the spills on residents.
It would be recalled that the Shell Petroleum Development Company (SPDC) previously sold its Oil Mining Lease (OML) 29 to Aiteo Group. The oil bloc covers areas including Opu Nembe and the neighbouring Otuabagi community, home to the historic Oloibiri oil wells, where Nigeria’s first commercial oil discovery was made.
The case is expected to continue after the court delivers its ruling on the motion to amend the defendant’s name.
