Court Disobeys Nestoil Order: FBN Receiver Sulu‑Gambari Issues Contempt Notice

Mr. Abubakar Sulu‑Gambari, SAN, was in his office on Wednesday when he received contempt of court notices, after what many legal observers described as a brazen and calculated defiance of an existing court order. The act has been condemned as a direct assault on judicial authority.

On December 1, 2025, the Federal High Court in Abuja issued Order No. FHC/ABJ/CS/2534/2025, directing all parties to maintain the status quo ante bellum pending the hearing and determination of the motions on notice, and expressly suspending the purported powers of the Receiver.

The contempt notices filed in Abuja on Wednesday stated that, despite the standing order, Mr. Sulu‑Gambari continued to act and present himself as Receiver/Manager. He issued multiple public press releases dated June 3, 2026 and June 4, 2026, published in national media, in which he asserted that he remained Receiver/Manager of Nestoil Limited and Neconde Energy Limited and warned the public against dealing with any other person.

Mr. Sulu‑Gambari was instructed that his actions constitute a willful disobedience of the Court’s order.

The contempt notice was served on the purported Receiver at his office.

In addition, the Supreme Court’s landmark judgment on June 1, 2026 (SC/CV/1130/2025) set aside all ex parte orders of the Court of Appeal dated November 27, 2025 that had favoured the purported Receiver.

Earlier, the Supreme Court, in its judgment of April 10, 2026 (SC/CV/46/2026), held that the authority of the purported receiver to act is central to and subject to the suit filed by his appointors in the Federal High Court, and therefore he cannot exercise receiver powers in the face of that suit.

The Supreme Court reiterated these points in its June 1, 2026 judgment, again setting aside the ex parte orders that had provided Mr. Sulu‑Gambari with judicial cover.

The Form 48 Notice of Consequences of Disobedience to Order of Court delivered on December 1, 2025 was issued pursuant to Order ix, Rules 1‑3 of the Judgement Enforcement Rules, Section 72 of the Sheriff and Civil Processes Act, 2004, and under the court’s inherent powers.

It reads, “Take Notice that unless you stop further disobedience and comply with the direction contained in the order of the Federal High Court Abuja made on the December 1, 2025, in Suit No. FHC/ABJ/CS/2369/2028 which ordered as follows:”

“That all parties in this suit are ordered to maintain the status quo ante bellum, pending the hearing and determination of the motions on notice, as the purported powers of the 2nd Defendant is hereby put on hold.”

Legal analysts say Mr. Sulu‑Gambari’s current actions go beyond mere non‑compliance and amount to a deliberate, sustained, and contemptuous challenge to the courts themselves.

Such conduct, they warn, strikes at the very foundation of the rule of law and is unacceptable in a constitutional democracy.

While noting that the consequences of contempt proceedings are severe, they stressed that continued defiance in the face of a subsisting court order and pending proceedings exposes the Receiver to immediate custodial sanctions, including imprisonment, as well as heavy fines and other punitive orders.

It has been alleged that Mr. Sulu‑Gambari deliberately concealed or failed to disclose that the exercise of any powers purportedly arising from the alleged Deeds of Appointment has been restrained, suspended, and placed in abeyance by subsisting orders of the Federal High Court, Abuja Division, presided over by Justice P. O Lifu in Suit No. FHC/ABJ/CS/2534/2025, since December 1, 2025.

Mr. Sulu‑Gambari is a defendant in that suit in person, is aware of the orders, and the orders remain extant and unchallenged to date.

“This is not just disobedience, it is a frontal attack on the justice system,” a senior legal practitioner noted, adding that, “If left unchecked, it undermines the very fabric of judicial authority.”

The unfolding situation sends a clear and unmistakable message: no individual, regardless of status or title, is above the law, and the courts retain both the power and the will to enforce compliance.