. Refers shareholder dispute to London Arbitration
Wale Igbintade
The Supreme Court of Mauritius has restrained the directors of Chappal Energies Mauritius Ltd from proceeding with the company’s planned US$100 million rights issue, pending the determination of an application for urgent relief before the London Court of International Arbitration (LCIA).
The interim order effectively stalls a controversial capital-raising exercise that Intermediate Investment Holdings Limited (IIHL) claims could have enabled minority shareholder R28 Limited, an investment vehicle linked to businessman Adebisi Adebutu, to increase its stake to nearly 85 per cent and assume effective control of the oil company.
Justice Carol Green Jokhoo granted the interim injunction following an ex parte application filed by IIHL through its counsel, Attorney J. Radhakissoon.
In the ruling, the judge held that the matter was sufficiently urgent to warrant immediate judicial intervention before the respondents could be served with court processes.
The court consequently restrained the directors of Chappal Energies Mauritius Ltd from proceeding with the rights issue pending the determination of the application for urgent relief by the Emergency Arbitrator in LCIA Arbitration No. 267070 or, if declined, by the arbitral tribunal constituted pursuant to the shareholders’ agreement.
Named as respondents are the directors of Chappal Energies Mauritius Ltd—Victor Ohioze Imevbore, Oyinlola Hezekiah Adesola Akande, Dada Solomon Thomas, Mike Cook, Vanesh Thakurdas and Arunagirinatha Runghien. Also joined as co-respondents are the Financial Services Commission, Chappal Energies Mauritius Ltd and Trustmoore (Mauritius) Limited.
IIHL, which owns 34.5 per cent of the issued share capital of Chappal Energies Mauritius Ltd, approached the Mauritius Supreme Court after alleging that the company sought to proceed with the equity raise without its consent or the participation of its sole director, Ufoma Immanuel, who is also the founder and Chief Executive Officer of Chappal Energies.
According to IIHL, the proposed rights issue violates the Amended and Restated Shareholders’ Agreement, which contains a binding arbitration clause requiring disputes among shareholders to be resolved through arbitration.
Documents filed before the LCIA indicate that the dispute arose from the Amended and Restated Shareholders’ Agreement executed among IIHL, Palisade Energies Limited, Frontier Energy Outcomes Limited, African Infrastructure Partners LLC, Kofmon Capital Investment Limited and Chappal Energies Mauritius Ltd, originally signed on July 21, 2023, and subsequently amended on April 24, 2025.
The disagreement intensified after a special shareholders’ meeting held on June 20, 2026, approved a US$100 million equity raise through a rights issue. IIHL alleged that despite holding 34.5 per cent of the company’s shares, it was excluded from the meeting where approval for the transaction was obtained.
The capital raise was reportedly initiated following the absence of Immanuel from the day-to-day management of the company due to criminal proceedings instituted against him in Nigeria by the Economic and Financial Crimes Commission.
According to documents made available to journalists, other shareholders argued that the fresh capital was required to strengthen the company’s financial position and support its ongoing operations.
However, IIHL contends that the exercise was designed to fundamentally alter the company’s ownership structure.
It alleged that R28 Limited proposed to inject funds into the company in exchange for a controlling interest approaching 85 per cent.
The proposal also reportedly sought reimbursement for business development expenses and included other conditions that some shareholders considered unfavourable.
The latest dispute is linked to a broader disagreement over ownership and control of shares within entities connected to Chappal Energies.
R28 Limited had earlier petitioned the EFCC over the dispute, which subsequently resulted in criminal proceedings against Immanuel and IIHL.
On March 11, 2026, the EFCC arraigned Immanuel and IIHL before Justice Mojisola Dada of the Special Offences Court in Ikeja, Lagos, on a two-count criminal charge.
The arraignment came despite earlier court decisions questioning the commission’s actions.
On September 11, 2025, the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja, presided over by Justice Josephine Obanor, restrained the EFCC from taking further action, observing that the dispute appeared to be predominantly civil in nature
Similarly, in February 2026, the Federal High Court in Lagos, presided over by Justice Dehinde Dipeolu, held that the EFCC acted unlawfully by declaring Immanuel wanted while a subsisting court order restraining such action remained in force.
Justice Dipeolu ruled that the declaration violated the provisions of the Administration of Criminal Justice Act and infringed Immanuel’s constitutional rights to personal liberty and freedom of movement.
The court ordered the anti-graft agency to withdraw all publications declaring him wanted, publish a retraction and pay him N5 million as compensation for the violation of his fundamental rights.
Despite those decisions, the EFCC later obtained a bench warrant from a court in Abuja. Working alongside the Department of State Services, the commission arrested and detained Immanuel before his eventual arraignment in Lagos.
Meanwhile, the Mauritius Supreme Court’s intervention has temporarily preserved the existing ownership structure of Chappal Energies pending arbitration.
On July 1, 2026, the Mauritius court directed the parties to proceed before the LCIA to determine their respective rights under the shareholders’ agreement.
The LCIA has since appointed Zoe O’Sullivan KC as the sole arbitrator to hear the dispute.
Chappal Energies has become the subject of complex legal and corporate battles involving its founder, minority shareholder R28 Limited and multiple judicial proceedings spanning Nigeria, Mauritius and the United Kingdom.
With interests in significant offshore oil and gas assets, the company occupies an important position in Nigeria’s energy sector.
The outcome of the arbitration and related court proceedings is expected to determine not only the future ownership and governance of Chappal Energies but also shape investor confidence in the enforcement of shareholder agreements and legal protections governing cross-border investments in Nigeria’s oil and gas industry.
