The Chinese firm Zhongshan Fucheng Industrial Investment Co. Limited is being reported as taking steps to confiscate the £20 million judgment cost awarded in favour of Nigeria against P&ID by a United Kingdom appeal court last month.
The company, which had earlier secured a court judgement in France to seize two Nigerian presidential planes, is also working to seize two properties in Liverpool belonging to the Nigerian government about the dispute between Ogun State and the Chinese firm.
Meanwhile, AGF and Minister of Justice Lateef Fagbemi have accused the Chinese firm of resorting to arm-twisting tactics to seize Nigerian assets in foreign jurisdictions.
Also, former Ogun State Governor, Senator Ibikunle Amosun, called Zhongshan an imposter yesterday, saying this dispute is like the P&ID situation where Nigeria eventually prevailed – and calls their attempt to seize Nigerian assets unlawful.
In March 2021 an arbitration tribunal – chaired by the president of the UK Supreme Court – awarded $74.5m (£57.8m) in compensation to the Chinese firm. Ogun State reportedly refused to pay this amount. Meanwhile, Nigeria’s inability to prove allegations of misrepresentation and concealment of facts against Zhongshan, among others, are said to be reasons the country lost its appeal against the arbitration award to the Chinese firm, a source from the US courts.
Recall that one of the reasons given by the Ogun State government for revoking the joint venture agreement with Zhongshan was based on information from Zhongshan that the Chinese company; CAI and its parent company have been liquidated and wound up without successor companies, adding that CAI could not execute the free trade zone project. One Mr Adeoluwa, who testified for Nigeria recalled how he wrote two letters in 2011/2012, relying on mouthwatering representations by Zhongfu about its ability to manage the Zone, as well as representations concerning and relating to CAIs incapability to manage the Zone and the criminal investigation in China involving its parent company.
The source, however, said that the arbitration held that there was no evidence presented by the witness to prove that CAI had been liquidated or had ceased to exist before 2011/2012 when he wrote and sent the letters. Besides, the tribunal noted that even if a case of misrepresentation was made, it was obvious that what led Adeoluwa into writing the 2011/2012 letters was his conviction about Zhongshan’s record and promises and CAI’s poor performance. It was the conclusion of the tribunal that Ogun State signed the 2013 JVA based on its assessment of Zhongshan’s ability.
On the allegations of concealment of material facts to the extent that Zhuhai and GXIG entered into an Entrustment of Equity Management Agreement, it was the position of the tribunal that the fact that Zhongshan did not inform Ogun State about the Equity Agreement, even if it became effective, did not amount to some sort of wrongdoing on the part of the company. According to the tribunal, the fact that A is negotiating, or even has negotiated, a contract with B, who is in a contractual relationship with C is not something which A is legally obliged to reveal to C when negotiating a contract with C, even if the negotiations are related to C’s contract with B.
