On Monday, a Federal High Court in Abuja saw a setback in the hearing of a lawsuit brought by Dangote Petroleum Refinery and Petrochemicals FZE to halt the granting of oil import permits to certain oil marketing businesses.
Dangote Refinery’s tardiness in serving the defendants with its modified originating summons prevented the matter from proceeding with its scheduled hearing before Justice Inyang Ekwo.Additionally, AYM Shafa Limited, A. A. Rano Limited, T. Time Petroleum Limited, 2015 Petroleum Limited, and Matrix Petroleum Services Limited were added as third and seventh defendants, respectively, in the original summons, which was dated September 6 and designated FHC/ABJ/CS/1324/2024.
Through attorney Ogwu Onoja, SAN, the oil corporation asked the court to revoke the import permits that NMDPRA had granted to the NNPCL and the five other businesses for the importation of refined petroleum products.
Additionally, the corporation (plaintiff) asked the court to rule that by granting licenses for the importation of petroleum products, NMDPRA had breached Sections 317(8) and (9) of the Petroleum Industry Act (PIA).
It said that these licenses should only be granted when there is a shortage of petroleum products.
Along with other reliefs, it demanded N100 billion in damages from NMDPRA for allegedly continuing to provide import permits to NNPCL and the five businesses for the importation of petroleum products.
George Ibrahim, who represented Dangote, the plaintiff, told the court that the case was scheduled for either a report of service or a report of settlement when it was called.
However, Ibrahim said that because of a petition to amend their original summons that was filed because of the inaccuracy found in the previous application, they had been unable to take action to achieve service of the processes and that concerns of reconciliation had also not been investigated.
According to him, the application was submitted on November 28, 2024, with a date of November 25, 2024.
The court was informed that the plaintiff’s application had not yet been served to the third, fourth, and seventh defendants (AYM Shafa, A.A. Rano Limited, and Matrix Limited), Ahmed Raji, SAN, and the fifth and sixth defendants (T. Time Petroleum and 2015 Petroleum Limited), Divine Oguru, by NMDPRA’s counsel, Mathew Bukar, SAN.
However, NNPCL’s second defendant, Ademola Abimbola, claimed that he was only served with the application at around nine in the morning before the court started to convene.
According to Abimbola, Dangote Refinery filed them with the updated originating summons because they argued that the second defendant shouldn’t have been involved in the lawsuit because it wasn’t being sued under its registered name.
Because the claim was already in the media, the plaintiff changed it, according to the lawyer, who said the application would be reviewed for a suitable answer.
“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 to Dangote.
The judge postponed the case until January 30 for a motion after advising Olanrewaju Oshinaike, the attorney for the party requesting to be joined, to hold off until the procedures were regularized.
NMDPRA asked the court to reject the lawsuit because it was ill-conceived, unworthy, and incompetent in its counter-affidavit, which was deposed by Idris Musa, a Senior Regulatory Officer in the agency, according to the source.
Dangote Refinery, according to Musa, is not eligible for any of the requested reliefs.
In the application, which was submitted on December 13, 2024, the official stated that Dangote Refinery’s existing output does not yet satisfy the country’s daily petroleum product sufficiency requirement.
According to him, NMDPRA granted licenses to import petroleum products to businesses with a solid track record of international product trading in order to fill product shortages, in accordance with Section 317 [9] of the Petroleum Industry Act.
He added that the agency’s duty also includes preventing unhealthy monopolies and the abuse of dominating market positions in the oil and gas industry, as well as promoting competition.
“An allegation for which the plaintiff has provided no facts or evidence in support,” he said, dismissing the claim that NMDPRA is involved in any alleged “grand conspiracy and concerted efforts” against the refinery.
According to the findings, the NNPCL also asked the court to dismiss the case for incompetence in its preliminary objection, which was filed on November 15, 2024.
In a joint counter-affidavit submitted on November 5, 2024, the oil marketers also warned the court that approving Dangote’s proposal would be disastrous for the nation’s oil industry.They contend that the country will suffer a catastrophe as a result of the attempt to monopolize the oil industry.
In their response, the three marketers—AYM Shafa Limited, A. A. Rano Limited, and Matrix Petroleum Services Limited—stated that the plaintiff did not manufacture enough petroleum products for Nigerians’ everyday needs.
Furthermore, they contended that no evidence to the contrary had been presented to the court.