Justice Inyang Ekwo of the Federal High Court, Abuja, has deferred the hearing of a suit initiated by Dangote Petroleum Refinery and Petrochemicals FZE against the Nigerian Midstream and Downstream Petroleum Regulatory Authority (NMDPRA) and others. The case, initially slated for proceedings, faced adjournment due to delays in serving amended originating summons on the defendants. The new hearing date has been set for January 30.
The Dangote Refinery had instituted legal action, naming NMDPRA and the Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation Limited (NNPCL) as the first and second defendants, respectively. Additionally, five other entities—AYM Shafa Limited, A.A. Rano Limited, T. Time Petroleum Limited, 2015 Petroleum Limited, and Matrix Petroleum Services Limited—were listed as third to seventh defendants under the originating summons marked FHC/ABJ/CS/1324/2024.
Dangote Refinery’s legal team has called for the nullification of oil import licences issued by NMDPRA to NNPCL and the aforementioned oil companies. According to the plaintiff, such authorizations contravene Sections 317(8) and (9) of the Petroleum Industry Act (PIA), which stipulate that licences for importing refined petroleum products should only be granted when a shortfall in national supply exists. The refinery also seeks damages of ₦100 billion against NMDPRA for allegedly persisting in issuing these licences, despite the purported regulatory breaches.
At the day’s hearing, George Ibrahim, counsel for the plaintiff, informed the court that neither reconciliation efforts nor service of the amended summons had progressed. This delay, he explained, stemmed from a motion filed to rectify errors identified in their original application. Legal representatives for the defendants, including NMDPRA and the oil marketing companies, confirmed they had yet to receive the amended processes. However, counsel for NNPCL, Ademola Abimbola, noted he had been served the revised application just before the court session began.
Abimbola elaborated that the plaintiff had amended its case following objections raised about the naming of NNPCL in the original suit, suggesting that the procedural update was primarily reactionary.
NMDPRA, in a counter-affidavit sworn by Idris Musa, a senior regulatory officer, contended that the refinery’s suit was baseless and legally deficient. Musa argued that the current output from the Dangote Refinery falls short of meeting the nation’s daily demand for refined petroleum products. Consequently, under Section 317(9) of the PIA, the authority was compelled to issue import licences to reputable firms to address the supply gap.
The regulatory body further maintained its obligation to foster market competition and thwart monopolistic practices in the oil sector. Musa dismissed allegations of a conspiracy to undermine the refinery as unsubstantiated.
Similarly, NNPCL filed a preliminary objection, urging the court to dismiss the suit on the grounds of incompetence. The oil marketers, in a joint counter-affidavit, warned that granting Dangote Refinery’s request would precipitate a crisis within Nigeria’s oil sector. They asserted that the plaintiff’s inability to sufficiently cater to national consumption demands rendered its monopoly ambitions untenable.
AYM Shafa Limited, A.A. Rano Limited, and Matrix Petroleum Services Limited jointly argued that the refinery’s claims lacked substantive evidence. They emphasized that monopolizing the sector would jeopardize market stability and create systemic risks detrimental to the nation’s energy supply chain.
As the legal proceedings unfold, the adjournment provides the stakeholders additional time to refine their positions. The court’s eventual ruling is anticipated to have far-reaching consequences for regulatory practices, market dynamics, and the broader petroleum industry in Nigeria.
