IOT Engineering Projects Ltd v Dangote Fertilizer Ltd & Anor [2014] EWCA Civ 1348 (16 October 2014)

The offer and acceptance of a parent company guarantee from Dangote Industries Limited, combined with insufficient evidence of a real risk of dissipation, meant that the requirements for a freezing order were not met. Routine enforcement difficulties in Nigeria do not justify such relief.

Citation: [2014] EWCA Civ 1348
Parties: Appellant: IOT Engineering Projects Limited; First Respondent: Dangote Fertilizer Limited; Second Respondent: IDBI Bank Limited
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
Judgment Date: 16 October 2014
Procedural Posture: Appeal / Appeal Against Refusal to Continue Freezing Order Beyond Interim Basis
Outcome: Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics: Freezing Orders, Risk of Dissipation, Enforcement of Arbitral Awards, Parent Company Guarantees

Civil Procedure Commercial Law Freezing Orders Risk of Dissipation Enforcement of Arbitral Awards Parent Company Guarantees

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 10

Parties

IOT Engineering Projects Limited

Appellant

Dangote Fertilizer Limited

First Respondent

IDBI Bank Limited

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Appeal Against Refusal to Continue Freezing Order Beyond Interim Basis

Legal Issues

1 Whether the risk of dissipation of assets justified the continuation of a freezing order
2 Whether difficulties in enforcing an award in Nigeria justify freezing order relief

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

Freezing order not continued beyond interim basis
Funds to be released subject to parent company guarantee from Dangote Industries Limited