The hearing continues at the Rivers State High Court in Port Harcourt on the N5 billion contract case between Nigerian Liquified Natural Gas (NLNG).
An Indigenous contractor, Macobarb International Limited, and its managing director, Shedrack Ogboru, have tendered 37 documents to prove how the NLNG owed Macobarb that vast sum of money.
Justice Chinwendu Nwogu marked the documents in the KJ series, but the defence said their objection to two papers would be submitted during the address.
This is the highlight of the hearing, which began in Port Harcourt in September 2024 after two years of preliminaries, many amendments between both parties and frequent counsel replacements by the claimant (Macobarb).
Ogboru of Macobarb relied on the statement of claims and the many amendments the CEO adopted on September 29 and November 1, 2024, in court, along with the 37 documents marked as exhibits in the KJ series by the court and the expert deposition.
Some of the submissions and documents include the letter written by NLNG General Counsel (Company Secretary), Akachukwu Nwokedi, to Festus Keyamo’s Chamber, which stated that the contract between the NLNG and Macobarb Int’l Ltd had no provisions for standby payment. Macobarb claimed that such a position by the NLNG legal department was why the NLNG refused to pay Macobarb.
Thus, Macobarb tendered many documents and quotes from the contract to show it had ‘standdown payment’ provisions. Macobarb also called in a forensic auditor to prove to the court those contract classes existed.
Macobarb’s position in adopted statements and claims insists that the standdown provision is plentifully provided for in the contract, one of which he said is on page 28, section 7, sub-section 5(11). This section states that; “In many situations, if NLNG fails to give Macobarb instructions or approvals (as in payment approvals) where the contractor has done his part by giving notification to the contract holder (NLNG), and several payment certificates have been generated by NLNG supervisory team for payment for work confirmed done, but the NLNG ignored such, and if this should lead to delay of the job on the part of the contractor, the contract shall be extended accordingly, and whatever cost it created shall be paid by the NLNG.”
Macobarb says there is abundant evidence that it fulfilled this clause by notifying the NLNG about this development (contract payment failures). Macobarb noted in the statements that they thus relied on the position of the NLNG general counsel arising from this failure to amend its claim to N5.074Bn.
Macobarb insists that NLNG’s failure to honour the terms of the contract closeout, as signed by both parties on the said date, has prevented Macobarb from demobilising its equipment. The forensic accountant thus relied on NLNG’s failures to further calculate the liability the NLNG has incurred by its alleged negligence or other actions by impliedly detaining Macobarb’s equipment on its site indefinitely.
Macobarb stated in its claims that whereas NLNG insists it owed no money to Macobarb, in the contract closeout of February 10, 2016, NLNG agreed to pay Macobarb for its 20-foot caravan and to pay the balance payment for turnstiles and vehicle barriers amounting to N38m but only paid N33m. They also allegedly failed to pay the various outstanding payments of previous milestones. He claimed the NLNG had promised to issue two cheques to cover all exceptional payments at contract closeout but allegedly failed.
Macobarb said that it thus relied on paragraphs 51 to 60 of its claims and minutes of meeting of contract closeout to amend the claims to N5.074Bn and pointed to the court the clauses that empowered Macobarb to make such claims, especially where the closeout agreement stated thus: “To close the contract, NLNG will establish what the cost for the materials delivered to them is, including the cost for the 20ft container (caravan) and its associated costs (reimbursable) as well as the cost for demobilisation, and prepare the payment certificates for all items of the contract executed by the contractor”. Macorbab said none of this has been done to this day.
As is contained in the amended claims, the parties further agreed: “Two valuations would be done based on the contract terms; the first shall capture all costs except demobilisation costs. The next valuation was to be done after the contractor demobilised his facilities. None of this was done.”
The submission to the court showed that the parties agreed, as contained in the meeting minutes: “Second and final valuation would be done after demobilisation of contractor’s temporary facilities from NLNG and retrieval of Identity Cards (badges) issued to all Macobarb personnel.”
Macobarb claims this has not been done due to NLNG’s refusal to honour their contract closeout agreement. For this reason, Ogboru said in the claims that Macobarb equipment or facilities are still on site in NLNG, for which Macobarb says NLNG is liable.
Further claims and amendments by Macobarb said that the NLNG reneged in its promise to the Rivers State House of Assembly to settle the matter outside the judge, That the debts have made Macobarb to be delisted by the banks for any further financial support or loans, That the NLNG did not only breach the contract but deliberately subverted it; and that the entire content of the arbiter zoom meeting of December 2020 was pleaded in evidence to show proof of the issues Macobarb pleaded in the meeting. Cross-examination will continue on November 29th and December 2 and 3, 2024.
We’ve got the edge. Get real-time reports, breaking scoops, and exclusive angles delivered straight to your phone. Don’t settle for stale news. Join LEADERSHIP NEWS on WhatsApp for 24/7 updates →
Join Our WhatsApp Channel
