The Federal High Court in Abuja on Wednesday adjourned hearing in a N100 billion suit filed by Dangote Petroleum Refinery and Petrochemicals FZE against the Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited (NNPCL) and others over the issuance of petroleum import licences.
The matter, which had been scheduled for hearing, was stalled due to the absence of the presiding judge, Justice Mohammed Umar, who was reported to be sitting at the Enugu Division of the court.
The case has now been rescheduled for November 5 for hearing.
Justice Umar had, on July 10, directed all parties in the suit to regularise their processes and ensure proper service of hearing notices on all defendants.
The suit, initially assigned to Justice Inyang Ekwo, is now starting de novo (afresh) following its reassignment to Justice Umar.
Dangote Refinery is challenging the issuance of petroleum import licences by the Nigerian Midstream and Downstream Petroleum Regulatory Authority (NMDPRA) and the NNPCL, listed as the 1st and 2nd defendants respectively.
Also joined as 3rd to 7th defendants are AYM Shafa Limited, A.A. Rano Limited, T. Time Petroleum Limited, 2015 Petroleum Limited, and Matrix Petroleum Services Limited.
Through its counsel, Mr. Ogwu Onoja (SAN), the refinery is asking the court to declare that the NMDPRA violated Sections 317(8) and (9) of the Petroleum Industry Act (PIA) by granting import licences to the NNPCL and other oil marketing firms despite no established shortfall in locally refined petroleum products.
The refinery is also seeking N100 billion in damages, alleging that the continued issuance of import permits undermines its operations and constitutes a breach of fair market practices.
The NNPCL, in its preliminary objection, asked the court to strike out the suit for lack of jurisdiction and for being incompetent, arguing that it disclosed no reasonable cause of action.
In a supporting affidavit deposed to by Isiaka Popoola, a clerk at Afe Babalola & Co, the NNPCL maintained that the plaintiff wrongly sued a non-existent entity, “Nigeria National Petroleum Corporation Limited,” which, according to the Corporate Affairs Commission (CAC) records, does not exist.
“A simple search on the CAC website shows that there is no entity called ‘Nigeria National Petroleum Corporation Limited,’” the affidavit stated, adding that the suit should therefore be struck out.
The NMDPRA, in its counter affidavit deposed to by Idris Musa, a Senior Regulatory Officer, urged the court to dismiss the suit as misconceived, unmeritorious, and incompetent.
Musa stated that Dangote Refinery’s current production output does not yet meet the national daily demand for petroleum products.
He said that, in line with Section 317(9) of the PIA, the NMDPRA issued import licences to qualified companies to bridge the supply gap and maintain stability in the domestic fuel market.
The regulatory authority further argued that it is legally mandated to promote competition and prevent market dominance, warning that Dangote’s position could create an unhealthy monopoly in the oil and gas sector.
“The allegation that NMDPRA is part of a ‘grand conspiracy’ against the refinery is unfounded and unsupported by evidence,” the affidavit added.
In a joint counter affidavit filed on Nov. 5, 2024, the independent marketers, AYM Shafa Ltd, A.A. Rano Ltd, and Matrix Petroleum Services Ltd, also opposed the suit, warning that granting Dangote’s request could destabilise the downstream sector.
They argued that the refinery has not produced sufficient quantities of petroleum products to meet national demand and that stopping imports would “create scarcity and chaos in the market.”
Recalled that Justice Ekwo, on March 18, dismissed an earlier preliminary objection filed by the NNPCL, describing it as incompetent.
The judge ruled that the company should have filed a counter affidavit responding to the refinery’s originating summons rather than raising jurisdictional objections at the preliminary stage.
Justice Ekwo also granted Dangote’s motion to amend its originating summons to correctly reflect the name of the NNPCL and dismissed a motion for joinder by the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (FCCPC), describing the agency as a “meddlesome interloper.”
The case will continue before Justice Umar on Nov. 5, 2025, for substantive hearing.
