The Federal High Court in Abuja on Monday adjourned a suit filed by Dangote Petroleum Refinery and Petrochemicals FZE challenging the issuance of petroleum import licenses to major oil marketers.
The delay stemmed from the plaintiff’s failure to serve amended court documents on the defendants, according to the News Agency of Nigeria.
The suit, marked FHC/ABJ/CS/1324/2024, alleges that the Nigeria Midstream and Downstream Petroleum Regulatory Authority (NMDPRA) violated Sections 317(8) and (9) of the Petroleum Industry Act (PIA) by granting import licenses to the Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited (NNPCL) and other oil marketers, including AYM Shafa Limited, A.A. Rano Limited, and Matrix Petroleum Services Limited, without evidence of a national petroleum shortfall.
Dangote Refinery, represented by Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN) Ogwu Onoja, seeks a court declaration nullifying the licenses and a ₦100 billion damages claim against NMDPRA for allegedly acting in breach of the law. The refinery argues that the issuance of such licenses is permissible only when local supply falls short of demand.
When the case was called, George Ibrahim, counsel for the plaintiff, admitted that the amended originating summons had not been properly served. He also cited unresolved reconciliation issues and a need to amend the application due to earlier errors.
Ibrahim, however, said they had been unable to take steps to effect service of the processes and that issues of reconciliation had also not been looked into because of a motion filed to amend their originating summons due to the error discovered in the earlier application.
Counsel for NMDPRA, Mathew Bukar, SAN; lawyer representing the 3rd, 4th, and 7th defendants (AYM Shafa, A.A. Rano Limited, and Matrix Limited), Ahmed Raji, SAN, and that of the 5th and 6th defendants (T. Time Petroleum and 2015 Petroleum Limited), Divine Oguru, told the court that they were yet to be served with the plaintiff’s application.
But Ademola Abimbola, who appeared for NNPCL (2nd defendant), said he was only served with the application at about 9 am before the court began sitting.
Abimbola said Dangote Refinery served them with the amended originating summons because they objected that the 2nd defendant should not have been a party in the suit since its registered name was not what it was sued with.
The lawyer, who said the plaintiff amended the suit because it was already in the media, said the application would be studied for an appropriate response.
“You have not been able to position this matter to be heard, and that is the cause of the adjournment,” Justice Ekwo told the lawyer representing Dangote.
The judge, who advised a counsel representing the party seeking to be joined, Olanrewaju Oshinaike, to wait until the processes were regularised, adjourned the matter until Jan. 30 for motion.
NAN reports that NMDPRA, in its counter affidavit deposed to by Idris Musa, a Senior Regulatory Officer in the office, appealed to the court to dismiss the suit, saying it was misconceived, unmeritorious, and incompetent.
Musa argued that Dangote Refinery is not entitled to any of the reliefs sought.
According to the report, the official, in the application dated and filed December 13, 2024, said the current production of Dangote Refinery is yet to meet the national daily petroleum products sufficiency requirement.
He said based on this and in compliance with Section 317 [9] of the PIA (Petroleum Industry Act), NMDPRA issued licenses to import petroleum products to bridge product shortfalls to companies with good track records of international products trading.
Besides, he said the agency is also mandated to promote competition and prevent abuse of dominant market positions and unhealthy monopolies in the oil and gas sector.
He denied the allegation that NMDPRA is partaking in any purported “grand conspiracy and concerted efforts” against the refinery, describing it as “an allegation for which the plaintiff has provided no facts or evidence in support.”
However, Justice Inyang Ekwo expressed frustration at the delays, warning Dangote’s legal team that their lack of preparedness was responsible for the adjournment. He advised a prospective party seeking to join the case to wait until procedural issues were resolved.
The matter was adjourned to January 30, 2025.
In its defense, NMDPRA submitted a counter-affidavit dismissing the suit as baseless. According to Idris Musa, a senior regulatory officer, Dangote Refinery’s current production does not meet the country’s daily petroleum needs, necessitating the import licenses under Section 317(9) of the PIA. Musa further argued that the agency is obligated to promote competition and prevent monopolistic practices.
NNPCL and other oil marketers echoed similar sentiments, opposing Dangote’s attempt to restrict imports. In their joint counter-affidavit, AYM Shafa, A.A. Rano, and Matrix Petroleum contended that the plaintiff’s limited production capacity could jeopardise the nation’s fuel supply if import licenses were revoked.