Supreme Court’s Verdict Restores Nestoil, Neconde’s Control, as Senior International Lenders Move Against FBN Trustees
A consortium of international senior lenders is set to return to court on June 22, 2026, in a decisive move to challenge what they describe as unlawful actions by First Bank Nigeria Trustees and its appointed Receiver-Manager.
The International senior lenders in Suit No FHC/L/CS/2545/2025 are alleging serious breaches of fiduciary duty and trust, including the creation of unauthorized security interests without their consent. They are seeking far-reaching reliefs—among them, the invalidation of the disputed security, the removal of FBN Trustees, and the complete ouster of the purported Receiver-Manager.
This comes on the heels of the landmark Supreme Court judgment of June 1, 2026, which fundamentally altered the landscape of the dispute. In a decisive ruling, the apex court set aside the Court of Appeal orders that had previously provided the legal cover for the Receiver-Manager’s actions.
Those orders had been aggressively relied upon to justify sweeping enforcement measures, including attempts to assume control over Nestoil and Neconde’s assets. With their nullification, the legal foundation for those actions has effectively collapsed and all assets and accounts of Neconde and Nestoil unfreezed.
Crucially, the Receiver’s powers had already been placed on hold by an earlier order of the Federal High Court dated December 1, 2025. The Supreme Court’s judgement has now reinforced that position by vacating all the legal basis for any continued assertion of authority over the companies.
At the heart of the senior lenders’ case is a compelling argument: that there was no legal trigger to justify FBN’s appointment of a receiver-manager in the first place.
It is also significant that the Supreme Court did not merely set aside the interim orders—it delivered a strong rebuke of the Court of Appeal for exceeding its jurisdiction and misusing ex parte processes to grant sweeping asset control without affording Nestoil and Neconde a fair hearing.
That criticism underscores the seriousness of the procedural breaches that underpinned the attempted enforcement.
Today, the position is clear and unambiguous. Control of assets, accounts, and operations has been fully restored to Nestoil and Neconde. The Receiver-Manager is on hold, his authority suspended and under direct legal challenge, while the very security supporting his appointment is now under intense judicial scrutiny.
Today, one fact is no longer in doubt: the Supreme Court’s ruling has dismantled the legal scaffolding that enabled the attempted takeover and reaffirmed the primacy of due process.
For Nestoil and Neconde, it marks a powerful reassertion of lawful corporate control.