Mobil Producing (Nig) Unltd V. Chief M.a. Ajanaku & Ors (2000)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

C. AGBO, J.C.A. 

In this application, the applicant is seeking a stay of proceedings in Suit No. FHC/L/CS/247/2002 pending before the Federal High Court at its Lagos Division.

The Writ of Summons in that suit was taken out on 15th March 2002. The Plaintiffs in the suit, now respondents, had pleaded in paragraphs 1 to 18 of their statement of claim as follows:

“1. The plaintiffs are fishermen and have instituted this action in a representative capacity on behalf of registered fishing co-operative societies and/or 272 communities whose members and peoples inhabit the coastal settlements and villages on the shores of the Atlantic Ocean, and the banks of the lagoons, estuaries, Creeks and rivers of the coastal region of Lagos State

(herein after referred to as the Waters of Life).

2. The defendant is an unlimited liability Company registered under the Laws of the Federal Republic of Nigeria with its head office at Mobile House, No. 1 Lekki Expressway, Victoria Island, Lagos and carries on the business for the purpose of, inter alia, prospecting, exploring and mining of crude oil both onshore and offshore within the territorial boundaries of Nigeria including the areas occupied by the Plaintiffs.
3. The Plaintiffs’ only occupation is fishing and fish farming which they carry out in the waters of Life and from which they earn 99 percent of their income.
4. The Waters of Life is pivotal to the life support systems of the plaintiff and also fundamental to their socio-economic well being.
5. The plaintiffs’ staple food is fish; and they depend on the said fishes and other aquatic mammals harvested from the Waters of Life for the supply of 95% of their protein food needs. The plaintiffs shall at trial rely on a lecture paper of Mr. Paul Caldwell, former Managing Director of the defendant Company published in This Day Newspaper of June 15, 1998 (the lecture) in proof thereof.
6. The plaintiffs wholly depend on the Waters of Life for domestic needs and uses, including but not limited to, cooking, bathing and washing.
7. The defendant had over 27 years ago constructed and placed pipes and mains to hold, keep and carry their oil, with various terminal points particularly at Qua Iboe and at all material times operated the same for the same purposes referred to in paragraph 2 above.
8. On about January 10, 1998, the said pipelines and Mains constructed by the defendant for conveying Crude oil from the defendant’s production platform (offshore) to the defendant’s Qua Iboe Terminal (onshore) in Akwa Ibom State, Nigeria ruptured and burst and resulted in the spillage of over 7.6 million litres of crude oil into the Atlantic Ocean (The spill is hereinafter referred to as the “Idoho Oil Spill”). The plaintiffs shall rely on the report in the Guardian Newspaper of January 24, 1998 in proof hereof.
9. The plaintiffs aver that the crude oil which polluted their environment as aforesaid was from the Idoho Oil Spill and shall rely on the Guardian Newspaper of the 3rd February 1998.

PARTICULARS OF SPILLAGE

(a) More than 40,000 barrels of crude oil was spilled

(b) A barrel of crude oil is the equivalent of 190,932 litres of crude oil.

(c) 40,000 barrels of crude oil is the equivalent of 7,637,280 litres of crude oil.

(d) The defendant in a Press Release published in the Guardian Newspaper of 2 February, 1998 acknowledged that the Idoho Oil Spill was a significant spill.

(e) The water environment of the Waters of Life which serves as means of livelihood to the fishes and other aquatic animals is a highly fragile environment, which can be easily and irreparably damaged by oil (crude) pollution. The plaintiff shall rely on the lecture referred to in paragraph 5 of proof hereof.

(f) A spill of significant quantity of crude oil into water inhabited by living organisms as acknowledged by the defendant has destructive effect on the organisms and on the ecosystem of the water.

12. The said Idoho Oil spillage had destructive and deleterious effects on the environment and adversely affected the socio-economic development of the inhabitants of the site of the spillage or areas of impact.
13. The plaintiffs aver that whenever there is oil spillage, it is always accompanied by negative and deleterious effects on nature and particularly on areas it impacts directly.

PARTICULARS

(a) Death of vegetation