header-logo header-logo

Nigeria wins $11bn victory against exploitative fraudsters

25 October 2023
Issue: 8046 / Categories: Legal News , Fraud
printer mail-detail
The Federal Republic of Nigeria has won its High Court challenge against an $11bn arbitration award granted to Process & Industrial Developments (PID), a hedge fund-backed company registered in the British Virgin Islands

The dispute arose from a 20-page gas supply and processing document agreed between the two parties in 2010. A dispute followed, which went to an arbitral tribunal as per the agreement, where in 2017 Nigeria was found to be in breach and liable to pay PID $6.6bn at 7% interest, bringing the amount at stake up to $11bn, which would have had significant financial implications for the Nigerian economy.

Ruling in Federal Republic of Nigeria v Process & Industrial Developments [2023] EWHC 2638 (Comm), Mr Justice Knowles said: ‘Nigeria did almost nothing to perform the [agreement] after signing but, according to Nigeria, neither did the other party.’

Knowles J found that PID obtained the arbitral award ‘only by practising the most severe abuses of the arbitral process’. In a lengthy judgment, he found PID and certain individuals associated with it had committed bribery, relied on knowingly false evidence and corruptly and improperly obtained Nigeria’s internal legal documents to benefit its own position in the arbitration.

He highlighted the impact of the ‘remarkable but very real’ case on the reputation of arbitration as a dispute resolution process, stating: ‘The risk is that arbitration as a process becomes less reliable, less able to find difficult but important new legal ground, and more vulnerable to fraud.’

Shaistah Akhtar (pictured), partner at Mishcon de Reya, who led Nigeria's legal team, said the judgment was ‘a historic result for Nigeria and its people.

‘The Nigerian government's resolve in pursuing a just outcome led to it uncovering overwhelming evidence of bribery and corruption. We are pleased that the judge recognised the severity of the fraud perpetrated against the people of Nigeria in his judgment, and trust that this landmark decision will deter other potential fraudsters and their backers from exploiting the legal system in the pursuit of monetary gain.’

A Federal Republic of Nigeria spokesperson said: ‘The brazen fraud perpetrated by PID has finally been revealed for all to see despite their consistent attempts to frustrate the passage of justice.’

Issue: 8046 / Categories: Legal News , Fraud
printer mail-details

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Pillsbury—Steven James

Pillsbury—Steven James

Firm boosts London IP capability with high-profile technology sector hire

Clarke Willmott—Michelle Seddon

Clarke Willmott—Michelle Seddon

Private client specialist joins as partner in Taunton office

DWF—Rory White-Andrews

DWF—Rory White-Andrews

Finance and restructuring offering strengthened by partner hire in London

NEWS
Mazur v Charles Russell Speechlys LLP [2025] EWHC 2341 (KB) continues to stir controversy across civil litigation, according to NLJ columnist Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School—AKA ‘The insider’
SRA v Goodwin is a rare disciplinary decision where a solicitor found to have acted dishonestly avoided being struck off, says Clare Hughes-Williams of DAC Beachcroft in this week's NLJ. The Solicitors Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT) imposed a 12-month suspension instead, citing medical evidence and the absence of harm to clients
In their latest Family Law Brief for NLJ, Ellie Hampson-Jones and Carla Ditz of Stewarts review three key family law rulings, including the latest instalment in the long-running saga of Potanin v Potanina
The Asian International Arbitration Centre’s sweeping reforms through its AIAC Suite of Rules 2026, unveiled at Asia ADR Week, are under examination in this week's NLJ by John (Ching Jack) Choi of Gresham Legal
In this week's issue of NLJ, Yasseen Gailani and Alexander Martin of Quinn Emanuel report on the High Court’s decision in Skatteforvaltningen (SKAT) v Solo Capital Partners LLP & Ors [2025], where Denmark’s tax authority failed to recover £1.4bn in disputed dividend tax refunds
back-to-top-scroll