BVI Court Orders $220 Million Judgment Against Former Seplat Chairman Orjiako in Landmark Debt Recovery Case

Join "What's Going On" WhatsApp Channel

The Commercial Division of the British Virgin Islands (BVI) High Court has ruled decisively in favour of Access Bank Plc, granting the Nigerian financial institution a summary judgment exceeding $220 million against businessman and former Seplat Energy Chairman, Dr. Ambrosie Bryant Chukwuemeka Orjiako, his wife, and eight offshore companies registered in the BVI.

Delivered by Justice Mithani on October 1, 2025, the judgment represents a major breakthrough in a long-running, multi-jurisdictional debt enforcement case that has drawn close attention within financial and legal communities across Nigeria, the United Kingdom, and the Caribbean, according to Prime Business Africa.

The ruling highlights the BVI Court’s growing willingness to disregard complex offshore corporate structures when there is convincing evidence of asset concealment or attempts to obstruct legitimate creditors.

A Dispute Spanning Over a Decade

The case dates back to 2013, when Shebah Exploration & Petroleum Company Limited (SEPCOL), controlled by Dr. Orjiako, obtained a $200 million syndicated loan from Afrexim Bank, Diamond Bank Plc, and Skye Bank Plc. Dr. Orjiako had personally guaranteed repayment of the facility.

When SEPCOL defaulted, the lenders called in the personal guarantee. Access Bank — having acquired Diamond Bank’s portfolio — subsequently secured a judgment against Dr. Orjiako from the English Commercial Court for the outstanding debt. The bank then pursued enforcement proceedings in the BVI, targeting assets suspected to be beneficially owned by Orjiako.

Central to the case were eight BVI-registered entities, including Abbeycourt Energy Services (BVI) Ltd, Plumage Management Ltd, Pursley Resources Ltd, Neville Investment Management Ltd, and Sinclair Commercial Ltd, which together held major stakes in Shebah Petroleum Development Company (BVI) — itself a key shareholder in Seplat Energy Plc, listed on both the Nigerian Exchange (NGX) and London Stock Exchange (LSE).

Access Bank alleged that between 2014 and 2017, after the loan default, Dr. Orjiako transferred ownership of these companies to his wife, Mrs. Igra Orjiako, as part of an effort to shield assets from creditors. The bank maintained that these transfers were fraudulent conveyances intended to frustrate enforcement.

Court Orders and Interim Measures

Before the substantive hearing, Access Bank secured a worldwide freezing order, as well as disclosure and interim receivership orders from the BVI Court — all designed to prevent the dissipation of assets during proceedings.

These interim measures enabled the bank to trace asset movements and establish that Dr. Orjiako retained control and benefit from the disputed companies, thereby strengthening its case for summary judgment — a legal mechanism allowing courts to issue rulings without a full trial when evidence is overwhelmingly clear.

The hearing took place in July 2025 before Justice Mithani and culminated in the October ruling, which is now being hailed as a landmark decision in cross-border debt recovery and enforcement.

 MORE NEWS:

• OTL 2025: Oyebanji Says Deregulation Sparks Renewed Focus on Infrastructure and Long-Term Growth in Downstream Sector
• OTL Platform Has Played A Crucial Role In Shaping Agenda For Downstream Development Across Africa- Sanwo-Olu
• Tinubu Reaffirms Support for Dangote Refinery Expansion, Calls on Africa to Harness $120B Oil Market
• OTL 2025: Africa’s Downstream Energy Leaders Unite to Drive Market Innovation and Strategic Investment
• OTL Africa Downstream Energy Week 2025 in Lagos: Driving Africa’s Downstream Transformation

ADVERTISEMENT

Judicial Findings: Fraud, Beneficial Ownership, and Sham Transfers

In a detailed 70-page judgment, Justice Mithani considered whether granting summary judgment was appropriate given the allegations of fraud and asset concealment.

He ruled that while courts must exercise caution in fraud cases, there is no absolute prohibition against summary judgment if the evidence is “clear, credible, and compelling” and the defence lacks any realistic foundation.

Rejecting vague or speculative defences, the judge stressed that defendants cannot rely on the mere possibility that “something might turn up” at trial. They must present tangible evidence capable of challenging the claimant’s case.

On the question of beneficial ownership, the judge found that Dr. Orjiako’s alleged transfers to his wife were sham transactions with no legitimate commercial basis. Applying principles from trust and property law, he held that Dr. Orjiako retained full control and continued to derive benefit from the assets after the supposed transfers.

“The evidence of beneficial ownership is overwhelming,” Justice Mithani wrote, adding that the defendants’ response amounted to “a bare denial unsupported by any contemporaneous evidence.” He concluded that proceeding to a full trial “would serve no useful purpose.”

Intent to Defraud and Insolvency

The court also upheld Access Bank’s alternative claim under Section 81 of the Conveyancing and Law of Property Act (CLPA), which invalidates transfers made with the intent to defraud creditors.

Justice Mithani found “a deliberate and systematic effort” by Dr. Orjiako to place assets beyond the reach of his creditors. The share transfers to Mrs. Orjiako, he said, occurred when the businessman was clearly insolvent and unable to meet his financial obligations without those assets.

The judge dismissed Orjiako’s defence that the transfers were made for “estate planning” as false and unconvincing, concluding that the “intent to defraud creditors was both dominant and undeniable.”

On the issue of consideration, the court rejected the defence argument that the transfers were supported by “natural love and affection.” Justice Mithani held that emotional or familial motives do not constitute valuable or good considerationunder fraud and conveyancing law, and found that Mrs. Orjiako was aware of the underlying intent.

Broader Legal Impact

The ruling clarifies several grey areas under BVI and English law, particularly regarding the interpretation of fraudulent intent and beneficial ownership in offshore corporate structures.

It also reinforces the court’s authority to grant summary judgment in complex fraud cases, signalling a more assertive stance by BVI courts in tackling attempts to misuse offshore entities for asset concealment.

For Access Bank, the decision represents a major victory in international debt enforcement, affirming its ability to pursue defaulting debtors and trace assets across jurisdictions — from London to Lagos to the Caribbean.

Legal practitioners view the case as a significant precedent in cross-border asset recovery, offering important insights into how courts apply fraudulent conveyance laws and assess beneficial ownership claims in offshore contexts.

The ruling also sends a strong message to Nigerian corporates and high-net-worth individuals with offshore holdings, underscoring the growing risks of using such structures to evade debt obligations.

Access Bank is now expected to move forward with asset recovery actions against the identified offshore holdings to enforce the $220 million judgment, plus accrued interest.

ADVERTISEMENT

By Idongesit Frank-Okafor, Probitas Report Energy Desk (WhatsApp Only: +234 902 148 8737)

Kindly share this story:

Contact: report@probitasreport.com 

Stay informed and ahead of the curve! Follow The ProbitasReport Online News Report on WhatsApp for real-time updates, breaking news, and exclusive content especially when it comes to integrity in business and financial fraud reporting. Don't miss any headline – and follow ProbitasReport on social media platforms @probitasreport

[©2025 ProbitasReport - All Rights Reserved. Reproduction or redistribution requires explicit permission.]