Notice: We are currently performing maintenance to improve the italaw platform. The site remains fully accessible. Thank you for your patience.

P&ID v. Nigeria, Ruling of the High Court of Justice of England and Wales, November 22, 2019

22 Nov 2019
Process and Industrial Developments Ltd (P&ID) v. Nigeria Ministry of Petroleum Resources
View case details
Ruling of the High Court of Justice of England and Wales
Document Details:
LISTED PARTICIPANTS
Ruling of the High Court of Justice of England and Wales
Participants listed are for this document only and may not include all participants involved in the entire case. Always consult the original documents.
Claimant appointee
Respondent appointee
Tribunal/Panel chair
Arbitrator(s)
Anthony Evans, Christopher Adebayo Ojo, Leonard Hubert Hoffmann
Sole Arbitrator
ICSID Annulment Committee president
ICSID Annulment Committee members
WTO Appellate Body members
WTO Appellate Body chair
Judges
Christopher John Butcher
Claimant's counsel
Ian Mill
Claimant's law firm
Respondent's counsel
Charles Hollander, Phillip Riches, Tom Pascoe
Respondent's law firm
Other counsel
Claimant's expert
Claimant's expert firm
Respondent's expert
Respondent's expert firm
Claimant's witness
Respondent's witness
Abubakar Malami
Other witnesses
Tribunal secretary
Tribunal assistant
Third-party funder
Entities
Kobre & Kim, Mishcon de Reya, Nigeria, Process and Industrial Developments Ltd.
Country
United Kingdom
Print reporter
Document Summary
Ruling of the High Court of Justice of England and Wales
This summary note is machine-generated. Always consult the original materials.

Procedural Posture

This Ruling by the High Court of Justice (Commercial Court) addresses an application by the Defendant, the Federal Republic of Nigeria, for an extension of time to comply with a condition attached to a stay of execution of an arbitral award in favor of Process & Industrial Developments Limited (P&ID).

Factual and Procedural Background

In a prior judgment dated 16 August 2019, the Court granted P&ID leave to enforce a US$6.6 billion arbitral award against Nigeria. Subsequently, on 26 September 2019, the Court granted Nigeria permission to appeal and stayed the execution of the enforcement order, subject to Nigeria paying US$200 million into court as security by 25 November 2019. Shortly before this deadline, Nigeria filed an "extension application" seeking additional time to comply, pending the determination of a separate "variation application." The variation application aimed to revoke the security condition entirely, relying on newly alleged evidence of fraud and bribery in the procurement of the underlying contract and the arbitral award.

Court's Analysis and Findings

Mr Justice Butcher evaluated the extension application under CPR 3.1(7), noting that varying an order requires a material change of circumstances or a misstatement of facts. The Court found that Nigeria's reliance on alleged fraud did not justify delaying the security payment, as the fraud allegations were largely known to Nigeria at the time of the original September order and were not brought forward with reasonable diligence. Furthermore, the Court rejected Nigeria's argument that it was practically unable to transfer the funds or procure a bank guarantee in time. The Court observed that Nigeria failed to take prompt and active steps to secure the funds or explore alternative security mechanisms immediately following the September order.

Disposition

Concluding that no true change of circumstances existed to justify extending the 60-day deadline, and emphasizing the overriding objective of enforcing compliance with court orders, the Court refused Nigeria's application for an extension of time.