Seplat Energy has announced that the Federal High Court sitting in Lagos, has vacated the ex parte interim orders against Seplat, its Chief Executive Officer, and its Board Chairman. These include the orders that restrained the company’s CEO Roger Brown from participating in the running of the Company.
The statement also noted that the case has been adjourned to May 16, 2023, to continue the hearing.
Recall that the ex parte interim orders were in relation to a court petition filed by 5 persons who claimed to be minority shareholders of the company. Seplat Energy has continued to maintain that the petition lacks proper basis and is premised on false allegations, adding that it remained confident that the judicial process will address the circumstances appropriately.
“The Company continues to engage with the Ministry of Interior. This announcement is made further to the Company’s announcement of March 10, 2023, and pursuant to Rule 17.10 of the Rulebook of the Nigerian Exchange, 2015 (Issuer’s Rule).
Responsibility for publication of this announcement has been authorised for publication by Mr Basil Omiyi, Independent Chairman, on behalf of the entire Board of Seplat Energy Plc,” the company said.
The Federal High Court in Lagos had restrained the Chief Executive Officer of Seplat Energy Plc, Mr Roger Brown from participating in the running of the company for a period of 7 days.
The interim orders were premised on allegations of unfair, prejudicial, and offensive acts by the Chairman, CEO and all of the Independent Non-Executive Directors (INEDs) of Seplat Energy.
The allegations included that the CEO organised a site visit for a number of its major shareholders to the company’s operations, cancelled some catering and landscaping contracts, and introduced a new job performance rating.
Seplat Energy refuted the allegations and notes that since Mr Brown became CEO in 2020, Nigerian nationals have been appointed to the company’s most important positions, including Chairman, Senior Independent Non-Executive Director, Chief Financial Officer and Chief Operating Officer.
The Board believed that the allegations were a spurious and vindictive reaction to the Board’s enforcement of corporate governance standards and a determination to continue to uphold their fiduciary duties and loyalty to the Company.
