Disobedience of Court in Nestoil Case: FBN Receiver, Sulu-Gambari, Slammed Contempt Notice
Alex Enumah in Abuja
Mr. Abubakar Sulu-Gambari, SAN, was on wednesday in his office, slammed with contempt of court notices, following what has been described as a brazen and calculated defiance of a subsisting order of court; an act many legal observers have condemned as a direct assault on the authority of the judiciary.
Recall that by its Order of December 1, 2025 in Suit No. FHC/ABJ/CS/2534/2025, the Federal High Court in Abuja unequivocally directed all parties to maintain the status quo ante bellum, pending the hearing and determination of the motions on notice, while expressly suspending the purported powers of the Receiver.
In the contempt notices filed Wednesday in Abuja, it was stated that despite the subsistence of the said Order, Mr. Sulu-Gambari continued to act and or hold himself out as Receiver/Manager, particularly by issuing multiple public press release dated June 3, 2026 and June 4, 2026 published in national media, wherein he asserted that he remain Receiver / Manager over Nestoil Limited and Neconde Energy Limited; and warned the general public against dealing with any other person.
Mr Sulu-Gambari was instructed to take further notice that his said acts constitute a willful disobedience of the Order of the Court.
The contempt notice was served on the purported Receiver in his office.
In addition, the recent landmark judgement of the Supreme Court on June 1, 2026, in SC/CV/1130/2025 set aside all the ex parte Orders of the Court of Appeal dated November 27, 2025 which had been in favour of the purported Receiver.
Also, the same Supreme Court, by its previous judgement of April 10, 2026 in SC/CV/46/2026 held that the authority of the purported receiver to act is at the heart of and subject of interrogation of the suit filed by his appointors at the Federal High Court and he therefore cannot purport to exercise powers of a receiver in the face of such suit.
The Supreme Court reiterated similar sentiments in its judgement of June 1, 2026 whilst setting aside the ex parte orders which had given Mr. Sulu-Gambari judicial cover.
The Form 48 Notice of Consequences of Disobedience to Order of Court delivered on December 1, 2025, was brought 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 inherent powers of the court.
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 the current actions of Mr Sulu-Gambari SAN, go beyond mere non-compliance and amount to a deliberate, sustained, and contemptuous challenge to the Courts itself.
Such conduct, they warn, strikes at the very foundation of the rule of law and is unacceptable in a constitutional democracy.
While pointing out 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 had deliberately concealed or failed to disclose that the exercise of any powers purportedly arising from the alleged Deeds of Appointment has since 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, he is aware of the orders and the orders are extant and unchallenged till 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.
