Tatutory body

Pursuant to the above, FL therefore forwarded to CT an invoice of pursuant to Clause 10 of the Agreement. However, by Acts analysis, there were errors In the computer science of PPTP In the 2009 measure level-headed opinion Issued by FIRS. CT Is also In dis obligation with the step employ by your Comp whatsoever in arriving at the royalty due for the rock embrocate produced. It was based on these beliefs, that CT forwarded to your Comp all the sum of and for respect legal opinion and royalty respectively totaling CT further requested that your Comp whatsoever challenges the tax assessment at the appropriate forum and re-compute the royalty cording to the established rates.It Is on the above premise that your Company the following relief (a) Declarations on the pertinent royalty rate and the correct calculation of PPTP returns (b) and specific damages for compensation of the outstanding tax and royalty sums of Looking at the above relief, the issues in question which wer e submitted to Arbitration arose out of alleged wrong assessment and computation of taxes by your Company due to the FIRS and by extension to the federal official judicature of Nigeria. So for all intents and purposes, the claim of your Company before the Orbital tribunal s in effect for declarations on the applicable royalty rate and calculation of PPTP.The Federal High court in the recent stopping point of Federal Inland tax income Service Vs Nigerian National rock anele Corporation & Others opined thus While it is conceded that the Parties are bound by the sanctity of their contracts and the issue in animosity arose out of the Agreement, the question still the Great Compromiser whether Parties can by an Agreement purport to confer legal power on an Arbitration Tribunal to determine issues relating to taxation of Companies or connected with the FederalGovernment tax when such Jurisdiction is exclusively conferred on this Court by the opus of the Federal Republic of Nige ria. The answer I must say is an emphasized No. In other words, the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria precludes any other Court in Nigeria other than the Federal High Court, not to talk of an inferior Arbitration Tribunal, from exercising Jurisdiction over tax matters relating to Federal Government Revenue.Although in simply parlance, one might be quick to say that given that EDP and FIRS re neither realmies to the agreement nor parties before the orbital jury, they do not have the venue stands to pretend such an application. Furthermore, it is a trite principle of Arbitration law that Courts of integrity must not be too hasty to make any injunctions or orders affecting arbitration proceedings. Be that as it whitethorn, We wish to pass by your attention to the recent decision in Federal Inland Revenue Service Vs Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation & Others wherein the A.Belle J headstrong that incidental thereto. It is not in dispute at all, that the plainti ff in this case is the traitors body established by Law to wit Federal Inland Revenue Service (Establishment) Act, 2007 as the Sole Federal function responsible for the assessment and collection of Taxes on behalf of the Federal Government of Nigeria. It stands to land therefore that in any dispute where the plaintiff perceived that its statutory functions are going to be affected by such dispute it pull up stakes necessarily have the requisite locus stands to bring an legal action to seek remedy.So, to my mind in the instant case, it is preposterous to argue as the 2nd- 5th Defendants did, arbitrarily f tax issues arising from production sharing contracts-that the Plaintiff has no locus stands to bring this action in which it alleges that its statutory functions to assess and collect tax for the Federal Government will be adversely affected in the Orbital proceedings between the Defendants in this case, unless on the ground that it is not party to the orbital proceedings.It is the very condition of its not being a party to the orbital proceedings that makes it strident for the Plaintiff to file this suit to protect its perceived interest in the subject matter of the arbitration. This Court is not unconcerned at this stage, with whether the Plaintiff will succeed because locus stands of a Plaintiff to sue is not dependent on whether or not its case will succeed. It is against this setting that I hold the view that the Plaintiff in this case has the locus stands to bring the present action.On this score therefore, this Court has the jurisdiction to entertain the case. From the predate decision of the Federal High Court, the Court has taken the stance that if the FIRS perceives that its statutory functions are going to be affected by any dispute, it will have the requisite locus stands to bring an action to seek remedy. The Court accordingly held that FIRS had a basis to bring the action and that the Court has Jurisdiction to entertain the case. This th erefore means that the EDP and FIRS may be minded(p) injunctive orders restraining continuation of the arbitration.Drawing from the above, the decision of the Tax Appeal Tribunal would be spine on CT and its preliminary objection to the Jurisdiction of the Orbital panel would be upheld. ACT The Nigerian means Development and Monitoring control board (UNCOMBED)s directive is made pursuant to the Nigerian Oil and Gas fabrication Content Development Act to enhance the level of participation of Nigerian and Nigerian companies in the countrys oil and gas industry. The Act provides for the submission of Nigerian Content Plan to form an essential component of bidding for any license, permit or interest in the oil and gas industry.It contains supply to ensure that first consideration is given to Nigerian and Nigerian Companies. The local theme gives force of law to the Nigerian Content Policy, which are already part of current oil regulations. The local content act establishes a lega l and regulatory framework for the involvement of and procrastination f indigenous oil and gas companies in the award of oil blocks, oil field licenses, oil lifting licenses and other projects. Under the Nigerian Oil and Gas Industry Content Development Act, rights or interests in an oil mining lease (MOL) may be transferred by assignment.However, an assignment can only be reasoned where the consent of the Minister of Petroleum Resources has first been obtained following the fulfillment of the relevant conditions. These conditions include that the proposed assignee Is of unattackable reputation, a member of a group of companies of practiced reputation, or is wend by a company or companies of good reputation. Has sufficient technical knowledge and experience, and sufficient financial resources to effectively work out under the license or lease.