A Port Harcourt High Court presided over by Justice Chinwendu Nwogu has fixed July 16, 2025, for judgment in the high-profile breach of contract case between indigenous contractor Macobarb International Limited and Nigeria Liquefied Natural Gas (NLNG) Limited. The suit, marked PHC/2013/CS/2022, stems from a N5.74 billion claim by Macobarb, which alleges that NLNG unlawfully terminated a contract awarded to it, causing extensive financial losses.
The judgment date was fixed for June 24, 2025, after counsel for both parties adopted and submitted their final written addresses in court. Macobarb’s lead counsel, Benefit Vilokpo, argued that the company had proven its claims with documentary evidence showing that NLNG breached the contract terms and issued a purported termination letter on November 27, 2015, through an individual not recognized in the contract one Emeka Ohiri, instead of the designated contract holder, Dweller Francis.
The claimant’s counsel emphasized that several provisions within the contract allowed for “standby payments,” which Macobarb says it is entitled to, and asserted that the contract was never officially closed out. To support this, Vilokpo cited a “project close-out meeting” held on February 19, 2016, which he said confirmed the contract remained in force. During that meeting, documented in Exhibit YJ5, NLNG acknowledged pending obligations, including valuing materials supplied and demobilization costs.
Macobarb also claimed that NLNG had acknowledged the receipt of project materials, including a 20-foot container, further indicating ongoing contractual engagement. NLNG’s lead counsel, Prof. Bayo Aderelegbe, urged the court to dismiss the claim, arguing that the termination of the contract was legitimate and executed by an authorized party.
Also Read: TAP FC hosts MOBILE FC of Lagos in Port Harcourt
He also challenged whether the second claimant had legal standing to sue and questioned the basis of the N5.74 billion claim, noting that the contract was a lump-sum agreement and the claimed amount exceeded its scope. Aderelegbe maintained that Macobarb failed to fulfill a key contractual obligation: submission of a Performance Bond within 14 days. He contended that this failure was sufficient grounds for the termination.
However, Macobarb’s counsel rebutted this, saying the contract did not specify who was responsible for submitting the Performance Bond. The company argued that since both parties failed in this regard, it should be treated as a mutual deviation, not a breach. Vilokpo further told the court that NLNG’s demand for the Performance Bond came 16 months into the contract, long after work had commenced, proving that its absence did not initially hinder project execution.
She also argued that NLNG’s own admission in its final address that the contract was “coming to an end” by November 27, 2015, implied it had not yet ended, presenting what she called a legal inconsistency. The case has been complicated by questions surrounding the contract’s termination procedure, the role of key signatories, and whether NLNG fulfilled its obligations in the close-out process. Macobarb has also cited its attempts to seek redress through the Nigerian Senate, which it argues shows it acted in good faith.
During proceedings, Justice Nwogu cautioned the claimant’s counsel that any new legal authorities cited during adumbration, if not originally included in the final address, would not be recognized or admitted into the court’s records. The case is seen as a litmus test for how disputes between multinational corporations and local contractors are interpreted and resolved under Nigerian law.
Industry watchers say the outcome may set a precedent in determining how strictly contract clauses like performance bonds and termination processes are enforced. With the stakes high and tensions between both sides evident, all eyes will be on the Port Harcourt High Court on July 16, when Justice Nwogu is expected to deliver what could be a landmark judgment.
