Malabu Oil & Gas Limited has approached the Federal High Court in Abuja, requesting a declaration that its deregistration by the Corporate Affairs Commission (CAC) is invalid and should be set aside.
The oil company, reportedly co-owned by Mohammed Abacha, son of the late former Head of State, Gen. Sani Abacha, is currently facing internal leadership disputes.
In an originating summons marked FHC/ABJ/CS/2137/2025, Malabu is suing the CAC over the alleged deregistration based on failure to file annual returns.
Represented by senior advocate Reuben Atabo, the company is also seeking an order to reinstate its name on the official register of companies in line with Section 692(6) of the Companies and Allied Matters Act (CAMA), 2020. Additionally, Malabu is seeking a perpetual injunction restraining the CAC from deregistering or striking it off again.
The company argues that, due to pending litigations involving the management and ownership of Malabu, the CAC acted improperly by striking it off the register. These legal disputes are currently before several courts, including cases such as FHC/ABJ/CS/51/2010, FHC/ABJ/CS/14/2017, and criminal charges CR/151/2020 and FHC/ABJ/CR/268/2016.
Mohammed Abacha, who personally deposed to an affidavit in support of the suit, stated that he was one of the founding directors and shareholders of Malabu Oil & Gas, incorporated in April 1998. According to him, the company was awarded Oil Prospecting License (OPL) 245 by the then Minister of Petroleum Resources following its application to the Department of Petroleum Resources.
He revealed that he was incarcerated from 1999 to 2002 under the Obasanjo administration, during which time unauthorized changes were made to Malabu’s shareholding structure and directorship without his knowledge or consent.
Abacha said he had instructed his lawyer as far back as 2005 to petition the CAC regarding the irregularities but received no resolution. This led to the initiation of legal proceedings in the Federal High Court in Abuja.
He further argued that the CAC failed to provide formal notice or publish its intention to deregister the company, as required under Section 692(3) of CAMA. The deregistration, he said, was carried out without lifting an earlier caveat that had prevented the company from filing annual returns.
He described the CAC’s action as unlawful and potentially damaging to the company’s legal and operational standing, especially in the face of ongoing litigation.
As of the time of this report, no date has been scheduled for the hearing of the case.