An Overview of Oil and Gas Contracts| Anemuyem Akpan & Uduak Nsungwara

An Overview of Oil and Gas Contracts| Anemuyem Akpan & Uduak Nsungwara

Introduction
The public and
private arrangements under which oil production is authorised have gone through
a variety of phases since the emergence of petroleum as an internationally
traded commodity in the middle decades of the last century (Smith, 1991).
International oil companies (IOCs) and host states (HSs) have over the years
adopted various schemes of arrangement to project and protect their interests.
The relationship between the IOCs and the HSs forms the substratum of the
petroleum industry and is accountable for the birth of various types of
contracts in industry.

It is through
these contracts that IOCs acquire the right to embark on Exploration and
Production (E&P) projects within the territory of the HSs. In particular,
they define, in case, commercial petroleum discoveries are developed and
exploited, how the production, income and risks will be allocated between the
government and the investor.
Types of E&P
Contracts
1. Concession
2. Production
Sharing Contract
3. Joint Venture
4. Service
Contract
1. Concession
Under this form
E&P contract, the government grants the IOC ( concessionaire) the exclusive
right natural resources in a given area for a specified period of time, in
exchange for payment of royalties and taxes (Cotula, 2010). Contemporary
practice indicates the modification of concession agreement to ensure greater
participation by host states. This modification finds expression in modern
concession contracts. In practice, allows for varying shades of government
supervision and participation.
2. Production
Sharing Contract
Production
sharing contract (PSC) is a distinct petroleum arrangement that has been
developed by many countries in the exploration and production of their
petroleum resources as it guarantees the sovereign right of the state over these
resources and meet their economic desires by providing capital and technology
for their production ( Ogunleye, 2015).
Introduced by
Indonesia in 1966, in opposition to the one-sided classical concession regime,
this form of E&P arrangement offer HSs greater participation in E&P
projects. PSC arrangements are resorted to when HSs seeks to reduce their
financial obligations in E&P projects, while not losing ownership and
participatory rights. The entirety of commercial risks is borne by the IOC who
executes the project on behalf of its self and the HS represented by its
National Oil Company (NOC).
On the project
becoming economically viable, both parties, both parties take their share of
the oil in accordance with the formula laid out in the law or contract. Royalty
oil is first allocated to the NOC in accordance with agreed quantum. Cost oil
which represents an IOC’s operating cost is then allocated to the contractor.
Tax oil, being the balance of oil after deducting royalty and cost oil is then
allocated to the NOC. The residue ( being what is left after the above
deductions is then shared between the IOC and NOC as profit oil according to
the terms of the PSC.
3. Joint
Venture Contract
Under this
arrangement, both the IOC and the NOC contribute to funding E&P operations
in the proportion of the JV equity holdings, and generally receive crude oil in
the same ratio (KPMG, 2014). A JVC creates a partnership agreement, in which
both parties interests somehow are balanced by jointly bearing the rights and obligations
in the petroleum operations (Ghadas & Karimsharif, 2014).
A key feature and
requirement in a JVC is that the HS should be able to participate in the
venture by meeting its full financial obligation. The inability of most HSs to
meet this requirement perhaps informs the resort to PSC. For example, the PSC
regime currently obtainable in Nigeria was a reaction of the government its
inability to discharge its financial obligations in many of its JVs.
JVCs can be
created either by contract or by incorporation. Within the regime, the joint
venture is created and managed through contractual agreements of the parties.
Both parties own the equipment and facilities of the project, as well as the
oil and gas productions (Al-Emadi, 2010). In the alternative, a separate legal
entity is formed with venture partners as shareholders with the objective of
carrying out E&P as set out by the JVC.
4. Service
Contract
Where a state (
as is the case with most oil producing states) lack technological capabilities
to exploit its resources), it may contract IOC to provide highly technical
E&P services in return for payment of a pre-determined fee. This is
arrangement is referred to as Service Contracts. Here, the IOC undertakes to
explore for petro carbons at its own risk and expense on behalf of the NOC and
by which it is reimbursed and remunerated in cash depending on the success of
the exploration (Guirauden, 2004).
This scheme of
arrangement can be categorised into either ‘pure service contract’ or ‘risk
service contract’. IOCs in pure service contract execute the E&P project in
exchange for a flat fee. Recovery of their operational cost is not tied to the
commercial viability of the project. An example of this is a contract to
construct at oil platform offshore. Once construction is completed and payment
is made to the IOC, the service contract comes to an end.
Risk service
contract incorporates an undertaking on the part of the IOC to bear all the
attendant risk of exploration, development and production of oil and gas. The reimbursement
of the IOC is predicated on the commercial viability of the project. Once there
is a declaration of commercial productivity, the company has a right to be paid
for its services and to additional compensation for the risk it has undertaken
(Smith, 1991).
Conclusion
The evolution of
oil and gas contracts reflects decades of struggle by HSs to obtain favourable
financial conditions and the desire of IOCs to maximise their profits. The
choice of a particular scheme should not be informed its wide international acceptance
and applicability. Rather, attention should be paid to factors like finance,
technology, political environment etc.
Currently, it may
appear as though oil and gas contracts have achieved apotheosis. However,
opportunities the development of newer schemes remain limitless. As events
around continue to re-shape the oil and gas industry, affecting prices, fiscal
policies and legal regimes, a new type of oil and gas contract may just be in
the waiting.
References
Smith, Ernest
(1991) From Concessions to Service Contracts, 27 Tulsa Law Review 493-524.
Leuch Honore ,
‘Recent Trends in Upstream Petroleum Agreement : Policy, Contractual, Fiscal
and Legal Issues ‘ in Andreas Goldthaw (ed) ‘ The Handbook of Global Energy
Policy.
Cotula L, (2010).
Investment Contracts and Sustainable Development; How to make Contracts for
Fairer and more Sustainable Natural Resources Investment (1st ed) International
Institute for Enviroment and Developmemt
Ogunleye Taiwo,
(2015), A Legal Analysis of Production Sharing Contract Agreements in the
Nigerian Petroleum Industry,5 Journal of Energy Technologies and Policy
KPGM Professional
Services Nigeria (2014) Nigeria’s Oil and Gas Industry Brief.
Ghadas Zuhairah
& Karimsharif Sabah, (2014) Types and Features of International Petroleum
Contracts. 4 South East Asia Journal of Contemporary Business,
Economics and Law, 34-40
Al-Emadi
Talal(2010) Joint Venture Contracts (JVCs) among Current Negotiated Petroleum
Contracts: A Literature Review of JVCs Development, Concept and Elements.Geo.
J. Int’l Law: The Summit 
645-667.
Guirauden, D.
(2004). Legal, Fiscal and Contractual Framework. In J.-P. F.-R.-R. Denis
Babusiaux, & N. F.-P. Bret-Rouzaut (Ed.), Oil and Gas Exploration and
Production; Reserves, Costs and Contracts (3rd Edition ed., pp. 170-210).
Paris, France: Editions Technip.
Disclaimer: This article is only intended to provide general
information on the subject matter and does not by itself create client/attorney
relationship between readers and the authors. Specialist legal advice should be
sought about the readers’ specific circumstances when they arise.

Anemuyem Akpan
& Uduak Nsungwara


Anemuyem Akpan is a Lagos-based Legal Practitioner. For
feedback, send an sms/mail to08063624048,
aloyanem@gmail.com
Ed’s Note – This article was originally published here.

Doing business in Nigeria: how foreigners can set up businesses in Nigeria| Hightower Lawyers

Doing business in Nigeria: how foreigners can set up businesses in Nigeria| Hightower Lawyers

Nigeria is ever-ready to welcome foreigners
to its shores, for business. There are many foreign controlled/owned businesses
contributing to her prosperity.

An important step which precedes a
foreigner’s ability to do business in Nigeria is setting up a viable business
structure. This text describes how a foreigner can register a company in
Nigeria.
According to Section 54, The
Company and Allied Matters Act,1990, (CAMA)
, every foreign company
incorporated outside Nigeria and having the intention of carrying on business
in Nigeria shall take all steps necessary to obtain incorporation as a separate
entity in Nigeria and until so incorporated, the foreign company shall not
carry on business in Nigeria.
The procedure of registering a foreign
company is the same as that of indigenous companies in Nigeria subject to
Section 22,24 and 25 CAMA, except that it shall not invite subscription for
shares without the prior approval of the Securities and Exchange Commission.
However, a company may be exempted from the
provision of Section 54,CAMA, after it has applied to the Federal Executive
Council through the office of the Secretary of the government in certain
instances, such as;
Where the foreign company was invited to
Nigeria by the federal government to execute any specified individual project.
Where the foreign company is in Nigeria for
the execution of specific individual loan project on behalf of a donor country
or international organisation.
Where foreign government owned companies
engage solely in export promotion activities.
A foreign company exempted from
registration under Section54, CAMA, shall have the status of an unregistered
company.
Furthermore, foreign companies just like
all other companies in Nigeria that intends to operate in Nigeria must be
registered with the Corporate Affairs Commission(CAC). The minimum share
capital which a Company must have is 10,000 (Ten thousand Naira). While for
foreign owned companies, the minimum share capital is 10,000,000 (Ten million
Naira).
It is compulsory that after registration,
the Tax Identification Number (TIN) of the company is obtained. The newly
registered company must also register for Value Added Tax (VAT) at the nearest
Federal Inland Revenue Service to its proposed office address.
Another crucial aspect is the funding of
the newly registered business. The newly registered business must open and
operate a domiciliary bank account with a commercial bank in Nigeria and obtain
certificate of capital importation.
The Company must concurrently register
at the Nigerian Investment Promotion Council (NIPC), and  obtain a
business permit from the Ministry of Internal Affairs.
Requirement for obtaining NIPC
registration

1. Application to the Nigeria Investment Promotion Commission

2. Completed copies of the NIPC Form 1 (in triplicates)

3. Original copy of receipt of purchase of NIPC Form 1 (and 3 copies)
d   Copy of Certificate of Incorporation

4. Memorandum and Article of Association

5. Evidence that the Company has a minimum share capital of 10million (3
copies)

6. Company’s allotment of shares- Form CO 2 (3 copies)

7. Company’s particulars of directors – Form CO 7 (3 copies)

8. Details of the shareholding structure of the company (3 copies)

9.  Shareholders agreement , where applicable (3 copies)

10. Registration with FIRS (Federal Inland Revenue Service)
Requirements for Business Permit
·       
Purchase
NIPC form I for N10,000.00. Completed form submitted with original receipt.
·       
Certificate
of Incorporation.
·       
A
minimum share capital holding in the joint venture.
·       
Details
of share holding in the joint venture.
·       
Joint
venture/partnership Agreement where applicable.
·       
Memorandum
and Articles of Association.
·       
CAC’s
Form CO2 and CO7 duly certified.
·       
Evidence
of capital importation for wholly foreign companies.
·       
Approval
from the appropriate professional bodies where applicable.
·       
We
recommend that you carefully read the information contained in this blog post
to understand what the procedure entails. In addition, you can engage a
reliable and experienced solicitor to guide you through the process.
·       
Are
you interested in setting up a Company in Nigeria? Need any help with the process?
Get in touch via email at hightowerlawyers@gmail.com or call +2347014979879.
You will be glad you did.
HightowerLawyers

This post was first published here
Did you know these legal facts  | Ahudiya Ukiwe

Did you know these legal facts | Ahudiya Ukiwe


  • That
    “419” is actually a section of the 
    Nigerian Criminal Code that
    indicates the offence of obtaining goods by false pretence and its punishment.

  • That
    it is an offence to dig/construct a borehole without a valid licence from the
    Minister of Natural Resources. So when considering to dig a borehole or go
    fetch water from that 
    Oga’s house, be aware that you both
    could be arrested, courtesy of 
    Sections 9-11 of the Water Resources
    Act.

  • The
    shortest law in Nigeria is possibly the 
    Financial Year Act. The
    Law simply defines what consists of a Financial Year (January 1- December 31)
    and “datsall”, 
    finish!

  • The
    Nigerian Constitution 
    expressly encourages inter-ethnic
    marriage. 
    Sec. 15 (3)(c) of the 1999 Constitution says ” …it
    shall be the duty of the State to encourage inter-marriage among persons from
    different places of origin, or of different religious, ethnic or linguistic
    association or ties;… This should provoke thoughts on the traditions of some
    states or tribes to only intra marry and never marry “outside”.
  • The
    Nigerian Government’s primary purpose is “provision of security, welfare”. It
    is therefore not a favour granted Nigerians but our rights. So says 
    Sec.
    14(2)(b) of the 1999 Constitution.

  • There
    is a law expressly against use of Army colour green on regular vehicles.
    Whenever we are tempted to swag in 
    camouflage or Army colour
    green
    remember you are contravening Section 1 of
    the 
    Army Colour Prohibition of Use Act.

  • That
    all forms of corrupt practices and abuse of power actually ought to be
    abolished by the Government. 
    Sec 15(5) of the 1999 Constitution states
    that this is a political objective of the State.

  • There
    is no existing law or statute providing for the display of pictures of the
    President and Governors on the walls of organizations.

  • Gaming
    machines are illegal in Nigeria. So when you watch those Hollywood movies with
    scenes of jackpot being played, be reminded that you cannot afford such a
    “luxury” in Nigeria. 
    Gaming Machines (Prohibition) Act.

  • That
    it is illegal to not display signboards of companies. 
    Section 548 of
    CAMA 
    provides that every company is to have painted and affixed (and
    very legibly too), its name and registration number placed in a very
    conspicuous position for all to see and know who and what you are. However,
    certain omissions (not failures o) probably should be considered. This is given
    the level of insecurity and exorbitant taxes levied against companies of
    certain status and located in certain areas; the ubiquitous presence of the 
    agberos, ever
    willing to squeeze out irrelevant fees solely assessed by them.

  • It
    is illegal to appoint persons predominantly of a particular State, region. 
    Section
    14(3) and (4) of the 1999 Constitution 
    state that such appointments
    (Federal or otherwise) should be done to “reflect the federal character of
    Nigeria… to promote national unity… to command national loyalty, thereby
    ensuring that there shall be no predominance of persons from a few States or
    from a few ethnic or other sectional groups in that Government or in any of its
    agencies.” Also, “The composition of the Government of a State, a local
    government council, or any of the agencies of such Government or council, and
    the conduct of the affairs of the Government or council or such agencies shall
    be carried out in such manner as to recognise the diversity of the people
    within its area of authority and the need to promote a sense of belonging and
    loyalty among all the peoples of the Federation”.



By – Ahudiya Ukiwe 
Photo Credit – www.ukfieldvolunteer.org.uk
Hague Rules: Autonomy and Superiority over Domestic Legislation in Nigeria | Adebanke Ajayi

Hague Rules: Autonomy and Superiority over Domestic Legislation in Nigeria | Adebanke Ajayi


At the onset of the second millennium, the
position of the Nigerian Jurisprudence pertaining to the hierarchy of
international treaties vis-avis domestic laws was that the former had no
superiority over the latter. Additionally, pursuant to section 12 (1) of the
1979 constitution in pari materia with Section 12(1) of the
1999 Constitution as amended, international treaties or conventions can only
assume the force of law in Nigeria following ratification by the National
Assembly. Section 12(1) of the Constitution provides as follows:


“No treaty between the Federation and any
other country shall have the force of law except to the extent to which any
such treaty has been enacted into law by the National Assembly.”

Furthermore, the Supreme Court in the case
of Abacha v Fawehinmi (2000) 6NWLR (Pt.660) 228 held
that an international treaty has no such force of law as to make its provisions
justiciable in our courts before its enactment into law by the National
Assembly. In the case under reference, the Apex Court examined the application
of the African Charter to the domestic enforcement of fundamental human rights
and concluded that the African Charter had the force of law in Nigeria having
been domesticated into our municipal law by the African Charter on Human and
Peoples’ Rights (Ratification and Enforcement) Act Cap. 10 Laws of the
Federation of Nigeria 1990. The Court further held that treaties which have
been incorporated into the body of the municipal laws such as the African
Charter ranks at par with the municipal laws.

Recently however, a different dimension
appears to have been introduced into this laid down principle in the case of JFS
Investment Limited V Brawal Line Limited & 2 Ors 
(2010) 18
NWLR [Pt.1225] 495, thus creating a dichotomy in its application to pre 1960
treaties and post 1979 treaties as between Nigeria and the international
community. A relevant example of a pre-1960 treaty is the Hague Rules 1924. The
Hague Rules 1924, codified in the Carriage of Goods by Sea Act Cap C2 Laws of
the Federation 2004 (COGSA), was an existing law in Nigeria at the time the
1979 Constitution came into force. Given that laws generally do not have
retroactive powers, the Supreme Court held that Section 12 of the 1979
constitution cannot affect the applicability of the Hague Rules 1924 in
Nigeria.

The reason for this exception is that by
October 1960 at the Nigerian Independence, the Government of the Federation
assumed all obligations and responsibilities of the colonial regime of the
government which arose from valid international instruments such as the Hague
Rules 1924. Nigeria became a party through exchange of letters between Hague,
the United Kingdom and the Government of Nigeria on October 1, 1960. The Hague
Rules 1924 was extended to Nigeria as a legislation which formed part of our
laws before independence, and was received as our laws after independence. As
such, the Supreme Court held that it does not require any further ratification
as stipulated in Section 12 of the 1979 Constitution before it can be applicable.

The Supreme Court further held that the
Hague Rules 1924 must be deemed to be an Act of the National Assembly having
assumed the force of law in Nigeria and that the principle in the case of Abacha
v Fawehinmi
 is only applicable to post 1979 treaties and not
pre-1960 treaties. Finally, the Apex Court per Adekeye JSC at page 436, held as
follows:

“The Hague Rules is autonomous and above
domestic legislation of the subscribing countries and the provisions cannot be
suspended or interrupted even by the agreement of the parties”. [Emphasis
Added].
From the foregoing, it would appear that
the Hague Rules have been elevated to a position superior to other domestic
legislations including the Constitution. However, we cannot seem to reconcile
this position with Section 1(1) of the Constitution which provides as
follows: 

“1 (1) This Constitution is supreme and its
provisions shall have binding force on all authorities and persons throughout
the Federal Republic of Nigeria.

It is our considered opinion that the
Supreme Court ought to have held that the autonomy of the Hague Rules and their
superiority to domestic legislations subsisted up until the enactment of the
1979 constitution. Thereafter, it became subsumed under the hierarchical
structure of statutes in Nigeria with the Constitution at the topmost echelon
as established in the case of Labiyi v. Anretiola (1992)
NWLR (Pt. 258) 139; (1992) LPELR-1730(SC). We hope the Supreme Court will have
the opportunity to again revisit this issue in the nearest future to give
effect to the provisions of Section 1 of the Constitution.  


Adebanke Ajayi is a Legal
Practitioner writing from Lagos.


This
post was first published here
Photo Credit – www.jux.law 
In The Interest Of Justice | Eberechi Okoh

In The Interest Of Justice | Eberechi Okoh

  
“…visiting the sin of
counsel on his client is not permitted by the law courts. What is not however
tolerated is where a counsel committed all unforgivable a fundamental blunder
which affects his case, such as filing a wrong or an incompetent originating process,
there is no way the court can blind its eyes to allow the process have its way,
as such.” Okpe v. Fan Milk Plc & Anor [2017] 2 NWLR (PT 1549)
310-311
On this note, the Supreme
Court gavelled the case to rest. The Appellants in the case cited above had
urged the Supreme court to set aside the judgment of the Court of Appeal
given in favour of the Respondents on the ground that it was predicated on a
Notice of Appeal which did not state the Respondent counsel’s name but bore
only the name of the law firm. The 1st Respondent on its part argued that
neither the parties nor the Court of Appeal was misled by the content of the
Notice of Appeal and urged the Supreme Court to consider what was in the
interest of justice in determining the issue. The Supreme Court allowed the
appeal and set aside the judgment of the Court of Appeal. Clearly, the Justices
had a definition of “justice” different from what counsel to the 1st respondent
had envisaged. For them, justice was a three-way traffic – justice to the
plaintiff/appellants, the defendants/respondents and the court itself. This is
a stance which counsel are all too familiar with.

It remains that lawyers
and non-lawyers will always disagree on what constitutes justice. While
non-lawyers see justice to be served by simply considering the facts and
rewarding the deserving party, lawyers consider procedural correctness which
means that proceedings, no matter how well conducted, will amount to a nullity
if there is a breach of a cardinal rule of procedure. In the words of Lord
Denning “You cannot put something on nothing and expect it to stand”.

The real question becomes,
not whether the interest of justice is the highest consideration, but what
constitutes justice in each case. In the case of Odom v. PDP [2015] 6
N.W.L.R (PT 1456) 527
, the Supreme Court emphasized that the attitude of
the Supreme Court is that whenever it is possible to determine a case on the
merit, the court will do so by refusing to cling to technicalities.
Consequently, litigants can expect that procedures and technicalities are not
so sacred as to upturn perceived justice all the time. However, prudent counsel
will ensure that their clients are not left hanging in the balance or at the
mercy of the Judge’s decision on how a procedural error will be treated.
Counsel must pay close attention to procedural matters, in the interest
of justice

Senior Associate at Streamsowers & Kohn
Ed’s Note – This article was originally posted
here

Desertion: When A Spouse Abandons Marriage After The Wedding| Hightower Lawyers

Desertion: When A Spouse Abandons Marriage After The Wedding| Hightower Lawyers

This is not legal advice.
This piece only seeks to educate and promote a healthy conversation.

In Nigeria, there is only
one ground for divorce. This is when a marriage has broken down
irretrievably
. Instances that lead to this include cruelty, adultery, and
desertion for at least one year.


Newly weds(and old
couples) have a legal duty to live together in the same household, though not
necessarily under the same roof. That is, they can live in different places or
countries as long as they have so agreed.

Desertion can be described
as a matrimonial misconduct, and it occurs when there is an intention to part
with the other spouse, coupled with the intent to bring the cohabitation(living
together) to an end. In a reported decision, the husband forced his wife out of
the matrimonial home, and abandoned her for three years without any
maintenance; it was held to amount to desertion.
Another example would be
instances where the husband deliberately moves out of the matrimonial home
without the consent of his wife, or where he lives a completely isolated life
from his wife, regardless of the fact that they live together, e.g. where he
cooks his own food, sleeps in a separate room, denies his wife sex and fails to
communicate with her.

In the same vein, when a
husband travels out of the country, in search of greener pastures, and never
comes back to his wife(family) or gets married to (or cohabitates permanently)
another woman, all these may amount to desertion. This is the present reality
of lots of married people in Nigeria.

However, four elements
must be established to prove desertion:
1.    
Actual separation of the spouses,
2.    
The intention to end cohabitation
permanently,
3.    
The lack of consent from the deserted
spouse,
4.    
Absence of just or reasonable cause for the
desertion.

Where the elements above
have been proved, the innocent party (i.e. the deserted partner) may sue for
judicial separation, restitution of conjugal rights, or even dissolution of
marriage.

The law affords the
innocent party the above mentioned options. Marriage – it is believed – is
contracted for different reasons. The law recognises that when companionship,
support, and all other benefits cease to exist, there is adequate reason to
dissolve such unions or seek other remedies.

In sum, if a spouse has
been deserted, there is a fitting prescription under the Nigerian law.

By – Hightower Lawyers
        www.hightowerlawyers.com
This article was first
posted here.

Medical Negligence In Nigeria: Addressing The Public On Its Scope And The Resultant Legal Implications

Medical Negligence In Nigeria: Addressing The Public On Its Scope And The Resultant Legal Implications

INTRODUCTION

It is not uncommon to see
this quote on a hospital building “We Care, God Heals”.

While the accuracy or
otherwise of that statement is not in contention, it is pertinent to ponder on
how much “care” medical practitioners owe their patients before the healing is
left in the hands of the most Supreme Being. Are Medical Doctors mere tools in
the hands of the creator? So much so that regardless of the magnanimity of
their efforts, high hopes should be kept at bay?


The reality that exists
today is that the average Nigerian, and surprisingly even the above Nigerian
has only a vague knowledge of the existence /or enforceability of the Laws
Governing Medical Negligence in Nigeria.

Do we have to accept every
mishap as the will of God? Is it the will of God that a stage 4 breast cancer
patient is diagnosed of a big and unusual boil until she writhes in pain before
suffering an untimely, painful and perhaps avoidable death? These things are
not news and I could write on about numerous examples while we lament about how
bad our Country is.

This Article however seeks
to equip the average Nigerians with useful information on steps to take in
dealing with health service providers.

DEFINITION
OF MEDICAL NEGLIGENCE
A definition of the term
Medical Negligence is apt at this juncture. Medical negligence can be defined
as improper, unskilled, or negligent treatment of a patient by a physician,
dentist, nurse, pharmacist or other health care professional. * (the free
dictionary by farlex)legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com

It is important to note
that whilst medical negligence is generally used in reference to Doctors, other
health care providers such as nurses, pharmacists, laboratory attendants and
any other health care provider can be liable for medical negligence.

WHAT
AMOUNTS TO MEDICAL NEGLIGENCE
The Rules of Professional
Conduct for Medical and Dental Practitioners also known as the Code of Medical
Ethics highlights some instances that would amount to Professional  Negligence. Some of these are:

(A)  Failure
to attend promptly to a patient requiring urgent attention when the
practitioner was in a position to do so.
(B)  Manifestation of incompetence in the
assessment of a patient.

(C)
Making an incorrect diagnosis particularly when the clinical features were so
glaring that no reasonable skillful practitioner could have failed to notice
them. 

(D) Failure to advise, or proffering wrong advice to, a patient on the
risk involved in a particular operation or course of treatment, especially if
such an operation or course of treatment is likely to result-in serious side
effects like deformity or loss of organ.

(E)
Failure to obtain the consent of the patient (informed or otherwise) before
proceeding on any surgical procedure or course of treatment, when such a consent
was necessary.

(F)
Making a mistake in treatment e.g. amputation of the wrong limb, inadvertent
termination of a pregnancy, prescribing the wrong drug in error for a correctly
diagnosed ailment, etc.

(G)
Failure to refer or transfer a patient in good time when such a referral or
transfer was necessary

H)
Failure to do anything that ought reasonably to have been done under any
circumstance for the good of the patient.

(I)
Failure to see a patient as often as his medical condition warrants or to make
proper notes of the practitioner’s observations and prescribed treatment during
such visits or to communicate with the patient or his relation as may be
necessary with regards to any developments, progress or prognosis in the
patient’s condition.
LAWS
GOVERNING MEDICAL ETHICS
There are various laws
governing medical practice in Nigeria and one of such Laws is the Medical and
Dental Practitioners Act (CAP M8) which is designed to regulate and govern
medical ethics in Nigeria and rules of professional conduct for Medical and
Dental Practitioners.  Another one is the
Rules of Professional Conduct for Medical and Dental Practitioners.

Globally, Medical
practitioners are governed by The Hippocratic Oath, ethical guidelines which
are historically taken by physicians summarily pledges to serve humanity to the
best of their ability and without discrimination of any sort and without
breaching patients confidentiality. Another one is the International Code of
Medical Ethics (Declaration of Venice 1983).

Despite all these, it is a
glaring reality that has come to abide with us that poor patient care, lack of
proper diagnosis, unsafe drug options, and limited treatment options are some
of the travails that affect Doctor/Patient relationships.
A
PRACTICAL EXAMPLE
To elucidate further and
put things in perspective, here is an example:
A pregnant woman falls
into labour and is taken to a popular Government Hospital and is informed that
she will have to undergo a caesarean section. 4 hours later, the woman is
referred to another hospital because of the unavailability of the Doctor on duty.
On getting to the referred hospital, the doctor on duty informed the patient
and her husband that there was no bed space. After much pleading, she was
eventually admitted and sedated despite protests from her husband against the
sedatives. The surgery was not carried out until the following day and the
baby, following the operation did not cry after delivery but was breathing and
moving her limbs.

It was discovered several
months down the line that the baby was asphyxiated during birth and the baby
was later diagnosed as suffering from cerebral palsy.

From this example, several
things can be deduced.
i.  The combined lack of adequate efforts of
the various Doctors that were in one way or the other involved in the birth of
that child does not meet the criteria of standard medical practice required.

ii.    It is apparent that there was negligence
during antenatal, delivery and post operative care.

The resulting consequence
of all this is a five year old child suffering from cerebral palsy a condition
which cannot be cured but only managed, bitter parents whose lives have been
altered forever, and a prolonged Trial that may or may not have a favorable
outcome. This is the story of thousands of people with different names,
different facts and different circumstances who have something in common: an
undeniable case of medical negligence and a struggle for their voices to be
heard.

AVAILABLE
OPTIONS
After all is said and
done, what are some of the options that are available to patients?
a.     A
report can be made at the Police Station who can prosecute where investigation
reveals gross negligence or where death has resulted from such negligence.
b. A complaint can be
filed with the Medical and Dental Council of Nigeria for appropriate redress.
The Medical and Dental Practitioners Act provides for an Investigation Tribunal
and where a prima facie case is established; a Disciplinary Tribunal. Thus,
Medical Practitioners who are found guilty of gross negligence are liable to:
(i) Suspension or a period
of six months; or
(ii) Having his name
struck off the medical or dental register, as the case may be.
c.      Patients
can also seek legal redress through a Court of law by filing civil claims for
tortuous liability and a breach of duty of care.
d.    Apart
from Litigation, another option available to patients is exploring other means
of alternative dispute resolution through Arbitration or Mediation. Alternative
Dispute Resolution greatly reduces cost and circumvents lengthy law suits.  The success of law suits is not always
guaranteed due to challenges such as the unwillingness of Doctors to give
expert reports in cases of Medical Negligence, however settlement can be a
preferred and outcome based solution where criminal liability is not involved.  Nonetheless, exploring these options do not
foreclose the patient’s constitutionally guaranteed right to trial.

SUGGESTIONS
It is imperative to state
that it is also advisable to make use of the National Health Insurance Scheme
which was established under the National Health Insurance Scheme Act, CAP N42
LFN 2004. The NHIS is aimed at providing quality healthcare in a cost effective
way and patients are offered a variety of health care options.

CONCLUSION
I am not unmindful of the
fact that we have a lot of progress to make as a nation in providing an
enabling environment with modern and innovative equipment to aid medical
practitioners in carrying out their duties. I am also not oblivious to the fact
that Doctors who are employed in Government hospitals constantly have to demand
adequate remuneration.

Notwithstanding, patients should remember that they
have rights, the right to ask questions, the right to get second opinions,
right to choose their preferred treatment options and a voice to complain.

We may not be able to
solve all of our challenges arising from medical negligence, however we can
collectively make efforts to make it bearable.
 
 By- Motunrayo Olaleye
 Legal Counsel at B. Ayorinde & Co. 

  Photo Credit – www.medical-negligence-dublin.com

Doing Business In Nigeria: Dealing With Incidents Of Fraud | Hightower Lawyers

Doing Business In Nigeria: Dealing With Incidents Of Fraud | Hightower Lawyers

In business, there’s
always a risk of being swindled, even when dealing with supposed ‘partners’,
agents, distributors, vendors or contractors.
Some protection is
afforded entrepreneurs, businesses, and businessmen within our laws. Several
law enforcement agencies in Nigeria also do a fine job of administering these
laws.


What fraud looks like?
Fraud comes in different
forms such as unjust enrichment, sharp practices, conflict of interest or abuse
of office and deceit.

It is unlawful enterprise
or scheme in which a dishonest individual uses deception to get an unfair
advantage over another. It could be under the guise of utilizing tricks
directly, or fooling someone else in order to get access to their money.

How to React
It is best to collaborate
with law enforcement agents. The complaint should be brought to their notice
via a well written petition that chronicles all material events leading up to
the loss or inconvenience suffered. When a contractor, partner or vendor unjustly
enriches himself at the expense of another person, or deceives the same person,
this should be reported to the relevant law enforcement agencies.

Why Lawyers?
By reason of their
practice, experience and skill-set, they are well positioned to help victims of
fraud when their services are sought. After consulting with the victim they
render counsel on how best to address the situation i.e. instituting an action
either in tort against the person(s) or as a criminal action.

How to involve Law
Enforcement Agencies
Law Enforcement Agencies
such as The Economic and Financial Crimes Commission (EFCC), The Independent
Corrupt Practices (and Related Offences) Commission (“ICPC”) and The Nigerian
Police Force (Special Fraud Unit) can be involved once the victim of fraud can
show with evidence that he has been defrauded. A victim’s complaint must
present a strong case for preliminary investigation.

The Economic and Financial
Crimes Commission (EFCC)
If an individual has been
defrauded, the popular way of seeking redress is by filing a petition as an
individual or an organization. Once this falls within the purview of the EFCC
Act, an investigation will commence right away.

The Independent Corrupt
Practices (and Related Offences) Commission (“ICPC”)
If anyone has been a
victim of fraud, the process through which they can seek relief is by filing a
petition at the Commission once they can show that the fraudulent act is within
the ambit of the commission.

 The Nigerian Police
Force (Special Fraud Unit)
The Nigerian Police Force
(Special Fraud Unit) has a mandate to tackle cases of special fraud and has the
following criteria to establish special fraud, namely:
  • The fraud in question exceeds
    N2,000,000;
  • There are Multiple victims of the
    suspected fraud; and
  • Other law enforcement agencies don’t
    have legal or financial capacity
Have you been a victim of
fraud? Contact the relevant Law Enforcement Agencies or seek the services of a
lawyer for legal advice and representation.
Hightower Lawyers 
Phone: +234 (0)70
1497 9879

Land Ratification/Regularization Policy of Lagos State- Would the Supreme Court’s Decision Have Been Different Had It Considered the Land Use Act?

Land Ratification/Regularization Policy of Lagos State- Would the Supreme Court’s Decision Have Been Different Had It Considered the Land Use Act?

Introduction
Lagos State, the former capital of Nigeria,
otherwise known as the ‘Centre of Excellence’ prides itself on being a
megacity. In order to maintain this lofty position, it generates a major part
of its own income and as a result, seeks to raise funds in whichever way
possible, sometimes to the chagrin of its citizens and just recently, the
Federal Government.

The megacity has a land regularization
policy which amongst other things, mandates a second registration of the title
to land held by purchasers of federal lands at the Lagos Lands Registry not
minding that the said title had originally been registered by the Federal
Ministry of Lands.
It was not surprising that the Federal
Government instituted a suit against the Lagos State Government in respect of
the regularization policy on grounds of what it termed as “Insubordination”.
Okay, I made that up. Not the suit part though. The Federal Government indeed
instituted the suit at the Supreme Court challenging the validity of the policy
vis-à-vis federal lands.

The Supreme Court in its ruling held that
from the evidence available before it, the Federal Government had divested
itself of the titles to properties which were subject of the suit and therefore
had no locus to bring the action. In simple parlance, the Supreme Court meant
that the federal lands in question had already been sold to third parties by the
Federal Government, as such, the lands no longer belonged to the Federal
Government. Therefore, it had no business suing in respect of them. Ouch!

As much as we commend the industry of the
Justices of the Supreme Court, we do not agree with its conclusion. It is
elementary that freehold interests no longer exist in Nigeria by virtue of
Section 1 of the Land Use Act (LUA) which vests ownership of all lands (except
land vested in the Federal government or its agencies by virtue of section 49
(1) of the LUA) in a State in the State Governor. Hence, the State Government
merely gives a lease of the lands to persons for a maximum period of 99 years
after which the property will revert back to the Government unless of course,
the lease is further extended in favour of the lessee or title holder. Section
49 Subrule 1 of the LUA provides as follows:

“nothing in this Act shall affect
any title to land whether developed or undeveloped held by the Federal
Government or any agency of the Federal Government at the commencement of this
Act and, accordingly, any such land shall continue to vest in the Federal
Government or the agency concerned.”

Furthermore Section 51(2) of the LUA
provides as follows:
The powers of a Governor under this
Act shall, in respect of land comprised in the Federal Capital Territory or any
land held or vested in the Federal Government in any State, be exercisable by
the Head of the Federal Military Government or any Federal Commissioner
designated by him in that behalf and references in this Act to Governor shall
be construed accordingly.

In light of the foregoing, it is apparent
that ownership and control of federal lands are vested, conferred, lodged or
bestowed upon the Federal Government. As such, all a title holder possesses is
a ‘right of occupancy’ in the technical sense and not ‘ownership’. Therefore,
we cannot fathom nor comprehend the Supreme Court’s reasoning that the Federal
Government in its capacity as an Overlord or Headlessor had no locus
standi
 to institute an action in respect of its lands.

It is our considered opinion that the
decision of the Supreme Court on the locus or lack
thereof of the Federal Government to institute the suit was made per
incuriam 
andwould have been different had the Court averted its mind
to the foregoing provisions of the Land Use Act. Unfortunately, this decision
remains binding until same is set aside by the Supreme Court itself. It would
appear that the ball now lies in the court of holders of title to federal lands
to contest the regularization policy of Lagos State before the High Courts of
Lagos State.

Adebanke Ajayi is a Legal Practitioner
writing from Lagos State.
 Adebanke Ajayi
Associate
Olawoyin & Olawoyin Legal
Practitioners & Consultants
Ed’s Note – This article was first
published here
Photo Credit – www.visalady.com 

Are Documents Made by Interested Persons to an Action Admissible in Court? | Adebanke Ajayi

Are Documents Made by Interested Persons to an Action Admissible in Court? | Adebanke Ajayi


Generally, a
document made by a person interested in an action either in anticipation of the
suit or during its pendency is inadmissible. See Section 83 (3) of the Evidence
Act 2011 as amended.

Who is an
interested person in this context?
An interested
person in the context of admissibility or otherwise of documentary evidence is
one who is likely to pervert the truth as a result of his pecuniary or other
material interest in the result of a proceeding. For example, say Mr. John Doe,
a pharmacist, is claiming damages in the sum of
1,000,000.00 (One Million Naira) from a pharmaceutical company on grounds
of negligence (Donoghue v Stevenson). If Mr. John Doe swears to an affidavit or
prepares an expert opinion in respect of his case, it stands to reason that
such document prepared by Mr. John Doe will most likely be in support of his
claims. Furthermore, due to Mr. John Doe’s proximity to the case, he may be
tempted to simulate the facts to suit his side of the story considering that he
has a lot to lose or gain from the results of the proceeding.
What nature of
interest will bar the admissibility of the document in question?
Where a person
has a personal interest in the results of a proceeding as against an interest
in an official capacity such as that of an employee or servant, any document
prepared by him in respect of the matter is inadmissible. In the case of UTC
(Nig.) Plc v Lawal (2013) LPELR-23002(SC) at page 27 paras A-F
, the
Supreme Court per Ariwoola J.S.C held as follows:
“…the interest
that is envisaged by the law which disqualifies is a personal interest not
merely interest in an official capacity…It does not mean an interest in the
sense of intellectual observation or an interest purely due to sympathy. It
means an interest in the legal sense, which imports something to be gained or
lost.”
Similarly, in the
case of Nigeria Social Insurance Trust V. Klifco Nigeria Ltd(2010)
LPELR-2006(SC)
 on pages 26-28, paras. D-G, 
the Supreme
Court per Chukwuma-Eneh, J.S.C held as follows:
“The nature of
the disqualifying interest will depend upon the nature of duty undertaken by
the servant. Where from the nature of the duty he can be relied upon to speak
the truth and that he will not be adversely affected thereby, the document has
always been admitted in evidence. This is because the rationale of the
provision is that he must be a person who has no temptation to depart
front the truth on one side or the other – a person not swayed by personal
interest, but completely detached judicial, impartial, independent” 
[Emphasis
Ours].
However, can one
accurately state that an employee has no personal interest in the outcome of a
proceeding to which his employer is a party? Can we safely conclude that a
document prepared by John Doe’s employee in respect of the negligence claim was
without any influence from John Doe himself? In light of these uncertainties,
we reckon that a determination by the courts, as to whether or not a document
prepared in an official capacity is ‘tainted with personal interest’ will have
to be decided on a case by case basis.

Adebanke
Ajayi
Associate
Olawoyin & Olawoyin Legal Practitioners
& Consultants
Ed’s Note – This article was first
published here
Photo Credit – www.visalady.com