By LAWANI MIKAIRU & DANIEL ETEGHE
LAGOS — The Federal Airports Authority of Nigeria, FAAN, yesterday, terminated two leases granted Bi-Courtney Limited at the Murtala Muhammed Airport, Ikeja for the development and management of a four-star hotel and conference centre, respectively.
This was contained in a statement by the General Manager, (Corporate Communications), Mr Yakubu Dati.
Dati said FAAN had, in two separate letters, dated April 19, 2012, informed Bi-Courtney that the leases granted it in respect of the two projects had been terminated as a result of breaches committed by the company in the agreements it signed with FAAN on the two projects.
He also said: “That by the said agreements, the two projects were to be completed in 2008 but FAAN graciously extended the construction period to July, 2009 but Bi-Courtney still failed to complete the two projects at the expiration of the extended period, pointing out that by the termination order, the demised premises, in respect of the two projects, have reverted to FAAN automatically, in line with the terms of the agreements.”
Bi-Courtney asks FAAN to be law-abiding
However, reacting to the development, Bi-Courtney Aviation Services Limited, BASL, asked FAAN to be law-abiding by respecting a subsisting court order restraining it from taking over the two facilities.
BASL spokesman, Steve Omolale-Ajulo, described it as laughable, as “Justice S. J. Adah of the Federal High Court, Ikeja Division, had, following BASL’s application on April 23, 2012, issued an order restraining the Attorney-General of the Federation, Inspector-General of Police, Managing Director of FAAN and FAAN itself (all defendants in the suit) from commencing, continuing and/or completing any actions or permitting the commencement, continuance and/or completion of any actions in respect of taking over possession of and/or interfering with applicant’s possession of the four-star hotel and the conference centre under construction at the Murtala Muhammed Airport Terminal Two, Ikeja, Lagos, pending the hearing and determination of the applicant’s application for interlocutory injunction.”