Abuja: The Federal High Court in Abuja, on Wednesday, dismissed the N100 billion suit filed by Dangote Petroleum Refinery and Petrochemicals FZE against the Nigeria National Petroleum Company Limited (NNPCL) and its co-defendants over an oil import licence dispute.
Justice Mohammed Umar dismissed the suit following an oral application by the defence lawyers after counsel who appeared for Dangote, C.O. Adegbe, withdrew the suit.
The suit, which was previously before Justice Inyang Ekwo, was reassigned to Justice Umar and began anew (denovo) following its reassignment.
Dangote Refinery had sued the Nigeria Midstream and Downstream Petroleum Regulatory Authority (NMDPRA) and Nigeria National Petroleum Corporation Limited (NNPCL) as 1st and 2nd defendants.
Also joined in the suit are AYM Shafa Limited, A. A. Rano Limited, T. Time Petroleum Limited, 2015 Petroleum Limited, and Matrix Petroleum Services Limited as the 3rd to 7th defendants, respectively.
The oil company, through its lawyer, Ogwu Onoja, SAN, had prayed the court to nullify import licences issued by NMDPRA to the NNPCL and the five other companies for the purpose of importing refined petroleum products.
It equally sought N100 billion in damages against NMDPRA for allegedly continuing to issue import licences to NNPCL and the five companies for importing petroleum products, among other reliefs.
Upon resuming hearing in the matter on Wednesday, Adegbe informed the court that, although the matter was scheduled for hearing, the plaintiff (Dangote) had filed a notice of discontinuance dated July 28.
She stated that the refinery had decided to withdraw the case and requested that the court strike it from the records.
Responding, I.B. Ahmad, who appeared for NMDPRA, did not oppose Adegbe’s application.
The lawyer, who acknowledged receipt of the notice of discontinuance, requested that the court not strike the case out but instead dismiss it in its entirety.
Also, Chris Ekemezie, who represented the 3rd, 4th, and 7th defendants (AYM Shafa Limited, A. A. Rano Limited, and Matrix Petroleum Services Limited), urged the court to dismiss the suit.
Ekemezie, who cited previous Supreme Court and Appeal Court cases, said that where such an application is made, the proper thing to do is to dismiss it.
According to him, an originating summons commenced this matter, and issues have been joined and pleadings exchanged. The honourable court had adjourned for today to hear the processes filed.
“It seems what the plaintiff (Dangote) plans to do is to go and panel-beat his case and come back, after seeing that his case is bad.
“So we urge my lord to dismiss it with substantive cost,” he said.
Mofesomo Tayo-Oyetibo, SAN, counsel for the 5th and 6th (T. Time Petroleum Limited, 2015 Petroleum Limited), also did not oppose the application for withdrawal of the suit.
He, however, aligned himself with the submissions of the other defence lawyers.
However, Adegbe disagreed with the defence’s application for the dismissal of the case.
She based her argument on the prior conversation her client had with the defendants that the matter should be struck out.
Justice Umar, consequently, dismissed the suit without any cost.
“The case on record is that parties have joined issues, and what remains is for parties to adopt their processes.
“It is at this stage that the plaintiff came for a withdrawal.
“In fact, the matter is deemed for dismissal and costs.
“But since it is not asked for, the matter is hereby dismissed without cost,” he ruled.
Dangote Refinery had prayed the court to declare that NMDPRA violated Sections 317(8) and (9) of the Petroleum Industry Act (PIA) by issuing licenses for the importation of petroleum products.
It stated that such licenses should only be issued in circumstances where there is a shortfall in petroleum products.
But NNPCL, in its preliminary objection, prayed the court to strike out the case for being incompetent.
The NNPCL argued that the suit was premature and that it disclosed no cause of action against it.
“This honourable court lacks the jurisdiction to hear this suit,” the NNPCL said.
In the affidavit in support of the application deposed to by Isiaka Popoola, a clerk in the law firm of Afe Babalola & Co, counsel to the NNPCL, he said one of their lawyers, Esther Longe, who perused Dangote’s originating summons, affidavit and written address, told him that an examination of the processes showed that NNPC, as sued by the refinery, was a non-existent entity.
Popoola averred that the court lacked jurisdiction over the 2nd defendant, sued as Nigeria National Petroleum Corporation Limited (NNPCL).
“A simple search on the CAC website shows that there is no entity called “Nigeria National Petroleum Corporation Limited (NNPC).”
According to Popoola, the 2nd defendant/objector is not the same as the 2nd defendant sued by the plaintiff.
He urged the court to strike out the suit.
Also, the NMDPRA, in its counter affidavit deposed to by Idris Musa, a Senior Regulatory Officer in the office, prayed the court to dismiss the suit as it was misconceived, unmeritorious and incompetent.
Musa argued that Dangote Refinery is not entitled to any of the reliefs sought.
The official, in the application dated and filed on December 13, 2024, stated that the current production of Dangote Refinery has yet to meet the national daily petroleum products sufficiency requirement.
He said that, based on this and in compliance with Section 317 [9] of the PIA (Petroleum Industry Act), NMDPRA issued licences to import petroleum products to bridge product shortfalls to companies with a good track record of international product trading.
Besides, he said the agency is also mandated to promote competition and prevent abuse of dominant market positions and unhealthy monopoly 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.”
The oil marketers, in a joint counter-affidavit filed on November 5, 2024, informed the court that granting Dangote’s application would be detrimental to the country’s oil sector.
According to them, the plan to monopolise the oil sector is a recipe for disaster in the country.
The three marketers, AYM Shafa Limited, A. A. Rano Limited, and Matrix Petroleum Services Limited, in their response, stated that the plaintiff did not produce adequate petroleum products for the daily consumption of Nigerians.
They argued that there was nothing placed before the court to prove the contrary.
NAN reports that Justice Ekwo had, on March 18, dismissed the NNPCL’s objection against Dangote’s suit
The judge dismissed the objection in the ruling because the application was deemed incompetent.
Justice Ekwo held that the NNPCL ought to have filed a defence in the form of a counter-affidavit to the Dangote Refinery’s originating process before objecting.
The judge, who also dismissed the NNPCL’s preliminary objection challenging the court’s jurisdiction, granted Dangote’s motion to amend its originating motion by correcting the name of the NNPCL.
Besides, Justice Ekwo also dismissed the motion for joinder filed by the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (FCCPC) as an unnecessary party and a “meddlesome interloper.”
