The Federal High Court in Abuja has dismissed the request by the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (FCCPC) to join a lawsuit filed by Dangote Petroleum Refinery. The refinery is seeking to stop the Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited (NNPCL) and other oil marketers from importing refined petroleum products into the country.
The ruling, delivered by Justice Inyang Ekwo on Tuesday, rejected the FCCPC’s application to join the ongoing suit, stating that the matter could be effectively determined without the involvement of the commission. According to Justice Ekwo, the FCCPC was neither a relevant nor necessary party in the case.
In the suit, Dangote Refinery, represented as the plaintiff, is challenging the Nigeria Midstream and Downstream Petroleum Regulatory Authority (NMDPRA), NNPCL, and five other oil marketing companies over the issuance of import licenses for refined petroleum products. The case, which was filed under the reference number FHC/ABJ/CS/1324/2024, has drawn attention due to its potential to impact the country’s oil importation policies and the market dominance of the companies involved.
Dangote Refinery, which has invested significantly in refining capacity in Nigeria, is seeking the nullification of the import licenses granted to NNPCL and other oil marketers by NMDPRA. The refinery argues that these licenses were improperly issued, claiming that they violated provisions of the Petroleum Industry Act (PIA), specifically sections 317(cool and (9), which stipulate that import licenses should only be issued in cases of a shortfall in the domestic supply of petroleum products. The refinery asserts that it has the capability to meet Nigeria’s petroleum needs and, therefore, the importation of refined products should be restricted.
Furthermore, Dangote Refinery is seeking N100 billion in damages against NMDPRA, accusing the agency of continuing to issue import licenses to NNPCL and other oil marketers despite the apparent surplus of local refining capacity.
The FCCPC, a government agency tasked with regulating competition and consumer protection, filed a motion to be included as a party in the lawsuit. The commission argued that the aim of Dangote Refinery to control the petroleum market could lead to monopolistic practices, which would be against the principles of fair competition as outlined in the commission’s mandate.
In its application, the FCCPC stated that Dangote Refinery’s actions could harm competition within the petroleum industry and adversely affect consumer welfare. The commission also claimed that any judgment in the case would have a direct impact on its responsibilities, including its role in overseeing market competition in Nigeria.
However, Dangote Refinery opposed the request, describing the FCCPC as an unnecessary party in the matter. The refinery contended that the case was rooted in the Petroleum Industry Act, a law passed by the National Assembly, and that the FCCPC had no jurisdiction or role in determining the legality of actions under the Act.
\
In addition to the FCCPC’s request for joinder, NNPCL, the second defendant in the case, filed a preliminary objection to the lawsuit. The state-run oil giant argued that the suit filed by Dangote Refinery was flawed on several grounds, including the use of an incorrect name for the company. According to NNPCL, the plaintiff had sued the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation (NNPC), an entity that no longer exists, as it was restructured into the NNPCL.
NNPCL further argued that the suit was premature, claiming that Dangote Refinery had no standing to file the case. The company contended that the court lacked the jurisdiction to hear the matter and requested that its name be struck out from the suit.
Justice Ekwo delivered his judgment on Tuesday, dismissing both the FCCPC’s application to join the suit and NNPCL’s objection to the court’s jurisdiction. In his ruling, Justice Ekwo found that the FCCPC’s request lacked merit and stated that the commission was not a necessary party in the case.
The judge also dismissed NNPCL’s objection to the plaintiff’s suit, ruling that the case could proceed as filed. He held that Dangote Refinery had the right to seek legal redress and that the court had jurisdiction over the matter.
In addition, the court granted Dangote Refinery permission to amend the suit to reflect the proper name of the NNPCL, addressing the issue raised by the second defendant regarding the use of the outdated name “NNPC.” The court also set a date for further proceedings, scheduling the next hearing for March 6, 2025.
The court’s dismissal of the FCCPC’s application and the NNPCL’s objection has significant implications for the case moving forward. With the FCCPC no longer involved in the suit, the focus will remain on the legality of the import licenses issued to NNPCL and other oil marketers and whether they comply with the provisions of the Petroleum Industry Act.
The ruling also sets a precedent for the ability of private companies, like Dangote Refinery, to challenge government agencies and state-run corporations over actions that they believe violate the law. The case could have far-reaching consequences for Nigeria’s oil and gas industry, particularly in terms of regulating competition and importation policies in the sector.
Additionally, the court’s approval for Dangote Refinery to amend the suit indicates that the case will continue to be scrutinized closely, as the refinery seeks to establish whether it has the legal right to prevent the importation of refined products and safeguard its market interests.
