Chinese Investor Seizes Nigerian Govt Properties In UKJune 23, 2024By: Innocent Odoh Two Nigerian properties located in the
United Kingdom are on the verge of being taken over by a Chinese investor
following an order granting the investor the right to enforce a $70 million
investment treaty award against Nigeria. The investor, Zhongshan Fucheng Industrial Investment, was
granted final charging orders over two UK residential properties owned by the
Nigerian government after the company also attached a £20 million debt relating
to the high-profile P&ID case. The Chinese firm secured this
order on June 14 when Master Sullivan in the Commercial Court in London granted
the orders in respect of two Liverpool properties estimated to be worth a
combined £1.7 million. According to the judge, the order was premised on
the fact that the properties have been converted to commercial use outside
Nigeria’s diplomatic or consular activities in the UK, stressing that
enforcement of the order should prevail. The high profile case was a gritty
legal battle between Zhongshan represented before the court by Withers and
barristers at 3VB, while Nigeria was represented by Squire Patton Boggs and a
barrister at Atkin Chambers. Sources said the underlying arbitration was in relation to a
joint venture with Nigeria’s Ogun State to establish a free trade zone near
Lagos in 2013. A Zhongshan subsidiary held a 60% stake in the project but Ogun
terminated its participation three years later. In 2021, a London-seated UNCITRAL
tribunal chaired by Lord Neuberger including Matthew Gearing KC and Rotimi
Oguneso SAN said Nigeria was guilty of expropriation and other breaches of the
China-Nigeria bilateral investment treaty and ordered the country to to pay
US$55.6 million plus interest and costs. Nigeria in the same year put a
challenge against the award in the Commercial Court on jurisdictional grounds.
Nigeria’s position was that the arbitration clause in the BIT was invalid. But
in later development, Nigeria withdrew the challenge before a hearing on
Zhongshan’s application for security and security for costs was about to take
place. Mrs Justice Cockerill in the same court granted Zhongshan an ex
parte enforcement order in December 2021, but Nigeria did not file againt this
order within the 74-day deadline allowed by the law. In July 2023, the Court of Appeal in London stopped Nigeria from bringing a
late challenge to the enforcement order, stressing Cockerill’s provisional
determination that state immunity did not apply had become final. The investor reportedly got interim
charging orders in June and August last year over the two properties in
Liverpool, which are owned by the Nigerian government. Nigeria’s efforts to dismiss these charging orders failed as Master Sullivan in
her judgement, held that the properties are leased to residential tenants and
that no “consular activities are actually taking place on the premises”. She also dismissed Nigeria’s arguments that it had not been
properly served with the interim charging order applications under the State
Immunity Act and that Zhongshan had failed to give full and frank disclosure
when seeking them. Master Sullivan also dismissed Nigeria’s objection about parties
bringing multiple enforcement action, saying that parties are “entitled to
bring as many types of enforcement action as they see fit to recover their
debt.” She noted that Nigeria had yet to pay any of the award and that the
value of the properties represented a “small proportion of it”. Timi Balogun of Squire Patton Boggs, counsel to Nigeria, said:
“We respectfully disagree with the Master’s decision, which we believe somewhat
brushes over complex public international law issues, including with respect to
state immunity and the right of a foreign state’s High Commission to own and
manage portfolios of fixed assets in England and Wales. We believe that such
issues need to be weighed very carefully, and we intend to appeal this decision
so that these complex and important issues can be considered by the higher
courts.” Zhongshan applied to enforce the award in Washington, DC in
2022. Last year, the DC district court rejected Nigeria’s motion to dismiss the
action on sovereign immunity grounds. The state argued the China-Nigeria BIT
was “quintessentially sovereign” and therefore the award did not arise from a
commercial relationship between the parties. The DC district proceeding is
stayed pending Nigeria’s appeal of the sovereign immunity decision. Zhongshan has also taken enforcement measures in various other
jurisdictions, including in Quebec, where it seeks conservatory seizure of a
private jet; and in Belgium, where Nigeria is challenging attachments of
properties. In the British Virgin Islands, Zhongshan has obtained an interim
attachment over a £20 million liability owed Nigeria by BVI-registered company
Process & Industrial Development (P&ID) under an English Commercial
Court ruling. The Chinese company withdrew an earlier application to attach the
same liability in England. The Commercial Court ordered P&ID
to pay Nigeria £20 million in costs in December last year after upholding the
state’s challenge to an US$11 billion award in favour of the company. Mr
Justice Robin Knowles found the award was procured through false evidence,
corrupt payments and improper retention of leaked documents. At the time of filing this report yesterday, Nigeria’s Ministry
of Foreign Affairs was yet to react to a message sent to it on this
development.
Source: The Leadership |