The Federal High Court in Uyo, Akwa Ibom State, has expressly stated that Blue Dolphin Petroleum Limited was not implicated in a petroleum-related offence prosecuted against Lib-Zone Petroleum Limited, ordering the release of three seized trucks belonging to the company.
The order was contained in a judgment delivered on April 3, 2025, by Justice Chigozie Onah in Charge No. FHC/UY/40C/25, involving the Federal Republic of Nigeria and Lib-Zone Petroleum Limited.
In its judgment, the court directed that three trucks with registration numbers AKP 222 XA, BNS 298 XA and AKP 223 XA be released to Blue Dolphin Petroleum Limited, which it specifically described as the third-party owner “who is not implicated in this offence.”
The case arose from a one-count charge against Lib-Zone Petroleum Limited over the alleged handling of Automotive Gas Oil (AGO) without an appropriate licence in January 2018 in Mbo Local Government Area of Akwa Ibom State.
The defendant pleaded guilty to the charge, following which the prosecution informed the court that a plea bargain agreement had been filed and sought its adoption.
In its consequential orders, the court directed that the adulterated AGO contained in three trucks be forfeited to the Federal Government and disposed of through an auction sale to be monitored by the court’s registry.
However, distinguishing the position of the third-party vehicle owner from that of the defendant, the court ordered that the three trucks be returned to Blue Dolphin Petroleum Limited, expressly stating that the company was not implicated in the offence.
The court also directed the defendant to enter into an undertaking with the prosecution to henceforth conduct its business within the ambit of the law.
The judgment has now become the basis of an appeal by solicitors to Blue Dolphin Petroleum Limited and its Managing Director, Edward Odey, asking the relevant commission to withdraw a 2020 publication on its database and social media platforms which allegedly linked their clients to illegal oil bunkering activities.
In the appeal, the solicitors argued that retaining the publication despite the court’s pronouncement was causing their clients reputational damage, loss of goodwill and business opportunities.
They urged the commission to remove the publication from its official platforms in the interest of justice, fairness and respect for judicial decisions.
The court’s express identification of Blue Dolphin as a third-party owner not implicated in the offence, alongside its order for the release of the three trucks, provides the central judicial basis for the company’s request for correction or withdrawal of the earlier publication.
The commission’s response to the appeal was not contained in the correspondence made available for this report.
