The Federal High Court in Abuja has adjourned a suit filed by Dangote Petroleum Refinery and Petrochemicals FZE against the Nigeria Midstream and Downstream Petroleum Regulatory Authority and six other defendants.
The adjournment, scheduled for January 30, follows an application by the plaintiff’s counsel, George Ibrahim (SAN), who requested permission to amend the originating summons.
Dangote Refinery and Petrochemicals FZE, in a suit marked FHC/ABJ/CS/1324/2024, is seeking to stop the issuance of oil import licenses to certain oil marketers.
Named as the 1st to 7th defendants in the case are the Nigeria Midstream and Downstream Petroleum Regulatory Authority, Nigerian National Petroleum Corporation Limited, AYM Shafa Limited, A.A. Rano Limited, T. Time Petroleum Limited, 2015 Petroleum Limited, and Matrix Petroleum Services Limited.
In its originating summons, Dangote Refinery prayed the court to nullify the import licences issued by the NMDPRA to the NNPCL and the five other companies for importing refined petroleum products, arguing that such actions violate Sections 317(8) and (9) of the Petroleum Industry Act (PIA).
Dangote Refinery claimed that these licences should only be issued in cases of proven shortfalls in local supply and accused NMDPRA of failing to support local refineries as mandated by the PIA.
In response, three major oil marketers—AYM Shafa Limited, A.A. Rano Limited, and Matrix Petroleum Services Limited—filed a counter-affidavit asking the court to dismiss Dangote Refinery’s suit.
The marketers contended that Dangote Refinery does not produce enough petroleum products to meet Nigeria’s daily consumption requirements and that granting the refinery a monopoly in the sector would harm the economy.
They maintained that the import licences issued to them were lawful and in compliance with the PIA, the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Act, and other relevant laws.
They further warned that granting Dangote Refinery exclusive control of the petroleum sector would eliminate competition, drive up prices, and destabilize the country’s fragile economy.
The marketers further warned that relying solely on Dangote Refinery for petroleum products could result in supply shortages and increased costs if the refinery experiences operational disruptions.
During Monday’s resumed hearing, the plaintiff’s counsel, Ibrahim (SAN), informed the court that the case had been scheduled for a report on settlement or service.
However, he stated that he had not been able to serve the amended originating summons on the defendants.
He also mentioned that the issue of settlement could not be addressed yet because of a motion filed to amend the originating summons, citing errors in the previous application.
Similarly, the defendants’ counsel confirmed that they had not been properly served and requested that service be completed before the case could proceed.
Mathew Bukar (SAN) appeared for the NMDPRA, Ahmed Raji (SAN) represented AYM Shafa, A.A. Rano Limited and Matrix Petroleum Services Limited, while Divine Oguru appeared for T. Time Petroleum and 2015 Petroleum Limited.
NNPCL counsel, Ademola Abimbola, on his part, informed the court that he had only been served with the application on Monday morning, shortly before the court session began.
Abimbola noted that Dangote Refinery served the amended originating summons after objections were raised regarding the inclusion of the NNPCL in the suit, as it had been sued under an incorrect registered name.
He further stated that the plaintiff amended the suit following media reports and added that the application would be reviewed to determine an appropriate response.
Justice Ekwo instructed Dangote Refinery’s counsel to ensure the case was properly positioned to be heard on the next adjourned date.
“You have not been able to position this matter to be heard, and that is the cause of the adjournment,” Justice Ekwo said.
