Court proceedings against AMNI in related companies, arise from same commercial dispute not separate creditor actions

Proceedings currently before the Federal High Court involving AMNI International Petroleum Development Company Limited arise from two related applications filed by companies with overlapping ownership and management, court documents indicate.

Join the Premium Times WhatsApp Community For Quick Access To News and Happenings Around You.

Open in WhatsApp

The matters, filed separately by Cenroc FPSO Solutions Nigeria Ltd. and CCM Vessel Management Company Limited, were instituted within the same period and stem from the same underlying commercial relationship and contractual engagements with AMNI.

Although filed as separate suits, both applications relate to claims arising from manpower and operational services provided in connection with AMNI’s offshore petroleum activities. Court filings show that the two claimant companies share common directors and control, a fact placed before the court by AMNI in the course of the proceedings.

In the earlier Cenroc matter, the Federal High Court delivered a ruling on 13 February 2026, appointing an Administrator in respect of the application. At subsequent proceedings, the court expressly clarified that no receiver or receiver-manager was appointed, and that AMNI is not in receivership.

“The court expressly clarified on record that no receiver or receiver-manager was appointed and that the company is not in receivership. Appeals and applications for stay are pending,” Didi Akinyelure, Head, Corporate Communications and spokesperson for AMNI, said.

A similar ruling was delivered this week in the CCM application. Legal observers note that both rulings arise from parallel proceedings based on the same factual matrix rather than from unrelated or independent creditor actions.

AMNI has filed Notices of Appeal and applications for stay of execution in respect of the rulings, which remain pending before the court. During proceedings earlier this week, the presiding judge cautioned the Administrator and his counsel against taking enforcement or extra-judicial steps pending the determination of the stay applications.