By Correspondent in Abuja.
The Federal High Court in Abuja has dismissed the ₦100 billion suit filed by Dangote Petroleum Refinery and Petrochemicals FZE against the Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited (NNPCL) and others over an oil import licence dispute.
Justice Mohammed Umar dismissed the suit on Wednesday following an oral application by defence lawyers after counsel for Dangote, C. O. Adegbe, formally withdrew the case.
Our correspondent reports that the suit, initially before Justice Inyang Ekwo, began de novo (afresh) after it was reassigned to Justice Umar.
Dangote Refinery had sued the Nigerian Midstream and Downstream Petroleum Regulatory Authority (NMDPRA) and the NNPCL as first and second defendants, while AYM Shafa Limited, A. A. Rano Limited, T. Time Petroleum Limited, 2015 Petroleum Limited, and Matrix Petroleum Services Limited were joined as third to seventh defendants.
Through its counsel, Ogwu Onoja (SAN), the refinery had sought a court order nullifying import licences issued by NMDPRA to NNPCL and the five oil companies for importing refined petroleum products. It also sought ₦100 billion in damages against NMDPRA for allegedly issuing import licences contrary to the provisions of the Petroleum Industry Act (PIA).
At Wednesday’s hearing, Adegbe informed the court that the plaintiff had filed a notice of discontinuance dated July 28, 2024, and urged the court to strike out the suit.
The Counsel to NMDPRA, I. B. Ahmad, did not oppose the withdrawal but prayed the court to dismiss the suit entirely, arguing that the matter had reached an advanced stage with issues already joined.
Similarly, the counsel for AYM Shafa, A. A. Rano, and Matrix Petroleum, Chris Ekemezie, supported the call for dismissal, citing appellate court precedents which held that once pleadings have been exchanged, such a case should be dismissed rather than struck out.
“It appears the plaintiff wants to ‘panel-beat’ its case and return after realising its weakness. We urge my lord to dismiss it with substantive cost,” he said.
Counsel to T. Time Petroleum Limited and 2015 Petroleum Limited, Mofesomo Tayo-Oyetibo (SAN), also aligned with the defence position but did not oppose the withdrawal.
Adegbe, however, urged the court to strike out the matter, insisting that the decision was based on earlier discussions between the parties.
In his ruling, Justice Umar held that the appropriate order in the circumstances was dismissal.
“The record shows that issues have been joined and parties were to adopt their processes when the plaintiff sought to withdraw. The matter is therefore deemed fit for dismissal. Since no cost was asked for, it is hereby dismissed without cost,” the judge ruled.
Dangote Refinery had alleged that NMDPRA violated Sections 317(8) and (9) of the PIA by issuing import licences for petroleum products without evidence of domestic shortfall, which it claimed should be the only condition for such licences.
However, in its preliminary objection, NNPCL argued that the suit was incompetent and disclosed no cause of action. It also claimed that the entity sued, “Nigeria National Petroleum Corporation Limited”, was non-existent, noting that a Corporate Affairs Commission (CAC) search revealed no such registration.
NMDPRA, in its counter affidavit, maintained that the refinery’s production was yet to meet national daily demand, thereby justifying the issuance of import licences to other companies to bridge the shortfall. It also said it was fulfilling its statutory duty to promote competition and prevent monopoly in the downstream sector.
The oil marketers, in their joint counter affidavit, warned that granting Dangote’s request would amount to creating a monopoly in the oil sector, which could harm the economy.
Earlier, in March 2024, Justice Ekwo had dismissed NNPCL’s preliminary objection to the suit, holding that the objection was incompetent and that NNPCL should have filed a defence before contesting the court’s jurisdiction.
The judge also dismissed a joinder application by the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (FCCPC), describing it as unnecessary and that the agency was a “meddlesome interloper.”
Edited by Dada Ahmed.
