The Federal High Court in Abuja has fixed 29 September for the hearing of a suit filed by Dangote Petroleum Refinery and Petrochemicals, seeking to block importation of petroleum products into Nigeria.
Dangote Refinery filed the suit against key regulatory bodies in the oil sector – Nigerian Midstream and Downstream Petroleum Regulatory Authority (NMDPRA) and the Nigerian National Petroleum Company (NNPC) Limited.
|
|
Also joined in the suit as defendants are other five oil marketing firms and the Dangote Refinery’s potential competitors alleged to have been issued import licences: AYM Shafa Ltd, A.A. Rano Ltd, T. Time Petroleum Ltd, 2015 Petroleum Ltd, and Matrix Petroleum Services Ltd.
Judge Mohammed Umar fixed the date on Thursday after counsel for Dangote Refinery, George Ibrahim, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), sought an adjournment to allow parties regularise their processes.
|
|
|
|---|
The defence lawyers did not oppose the request.
The case was formerly before Inyang Ekwo, who was suspended last month for one year. The suit began afresh following its reassignment to Mr Umar.
Background
On 6 September 2024, Dangote Petroleum Refinery and Petrochemicals FZE instituted the suit over the issuance of petroleum product import licences to some companies.
The plaintiff asked the court to declare that the licences issued by the regulatory agency to the other defendants violated Sections 317(8) and (9) of the Petroleum Industry Act, 2021, which permit such imports only in the event of a shortfall. It also sought N100 billion in damages against the authority for allegedly undermining local refining capacity.
In its counter-affidavit sworn to by Idris Musa, a Senior Regulatory Officer, NMDPRA, argued that Dangote Refinery was not entitled to the prayers sought. Mr Musa said that the refinery’s production does not yet meet the national daily consumption requirement.
He added that, in line with Section 317(9) of the Petroleum Industry Act, NMDPRA issued import licences to companies with a track record of international products trading to bridge the supply gap.
Mr Musa said the agency is mandated to promote competition and prevent monopolies in the sector, denying allegations of conspiracy against the plaintiff.
NMDPRA further clarified that it issued oil licences to NNPC Limited and oil marketers to address petroleum product shortfalls in the country.
In November, AYM Shafa Ltd (3rd defendant), A.A. Rano Ltd (4th defendant), and Matrix Petroleum Services Ltd (7th defendant) filed a joint counter-affidavit opposing the suit, warning that granting the plaintiff’s request would create a monopoly in the downstream oil sector
Similarly, in December, the regulatory agency NMDPRA, filed its counter-affidavit, maintaining that the refinery’s production at the time did not meet national sufficiency and that the licences were issued in accordance with the law to bridge supply gaps.
On 9 December , the plaintiff sought a motion to amend its originating process to correct the name of the second defendant from “Nigeria National Petroleum Corporation Limited” to “Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited.”
In response, the second defendant, NNPC Limited raised a preliminary objection, arguing that the suit was incompetent and should be struck out for misidentification, among other grounds. The objection was supported by an affidavit deposed to by Isiaka Popoola, a litigation clerk in the law firm representing the company.
On 18 March, the then-judge, Mr Ekwo, dismissed the objection, ruling that the error in name did not render the suit defective. The court also held that the defendants ought to have responded to the substantive claims before raising procedural objections.
On 19 March, the judge granted the plaintiff’s motion to amend its originating summons and directed parties to proceed on the merits of the case.
Adjournment
At the resumed session, Mr. Ibrahim informed the court that the matter was slated for mention. He explained that Justice Ekwo had earlier granted an order for amendment, which had already been effected.
He added while some defendants had regularised their processes, others, including NMDPRA, were yet to do so.
He reminded the court that while the matter was before Mr Ekwo, NNPC filed a notice of preliminary objection which was refused.
However, the company filed a fresh preliminary objection in June, and Dangote Refinery responded. He therefore requested an adjournment to enable all parties to regularise their filings.
FCCPC seeks to join the suit
Basima Terhemba, who appeared for the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (FCCPC), a party seeking to join the suit, informed the court that the commission had appealed a ruling that dismissed its joinder application.
He noted that the appeal had been filed and that the case concerned FCCPC’s core mandate. He argued that a ruling without the commission’s participation could be prejudicial.
In response, Mr Ibrahim said the former judge had ruled that FCCPC was not a relevant party, describing it as a “meddlesome interloper.” He urged the court to proceed without the commission, whose appeal, he claimed lacked substance.
Mr Umar agreed that the appeal should not hinder the main case from progressing and adjourned the matter until 29 September. He also ordered that hearing notices be served on the defendants.
Dangote Refinery
The Dangote Refinery, a massive project designed to process 650,000 barrels of crude oil per day, began operation in 2023, with the aim of ending Nigeria’s reliance on imported refined petroleum products and boosting the nation’s energy security.
However, the refinery faced controversy related to crude oil supply shortages, pricing disputes, and concerns about its impact on domestic fuel prices and the overall economy.
Last year, NNPC ended its exclusive purchase agreement with Dangote Refinery, opening up the market for other marketers to buy petrol directly from the refinery.
Discover more from Premium Times Nigeria
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
