The Federal High Court (FHC) in Abuja on Thursday, fixed September 29 for hearing of a suit filed by Dangote Petroleum Refinery and Petrochemicals FZE against the Nigeria National Petroleum Company Limited (NNPCL) and others over oil import licence dispute.
Justice Mohammed Umar fixed the date after George Ibrahim, SAN, counsel to Dangote Refinery, sought an adjournment to enable parties regularise their processes and the defence lawyer did not oppose the request.
The suit, formerly before Justice Inyang Ekwo, began denovo (afresh) following its reassignment to Justice Umar.
Dangote Refinery sued the Nigeria Midstream and Downstream Petroleum Regulatory Authority (NMDPRA) and the 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 3rd to 7th defendants respectively.
The oil company, through its lawyer, Ogwu Onoja, SAN, 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.
Upon resumed session, Mr Ibrahim informed the court that the matter was slated for mention.
He said, “There are developments that took place in this matter which is the fact that My Lord Justice Ekwo who was in the matter before granted an order for amendment which had been done.’’
He said though some of the defendants had regularised their processes, he said some had yet to do the needful, including the 1st defendant represented in court.
He informed the court that while the matter was before Justice Ekwo, the NNPCL served them with a notice of preliminary objection which was refused by the court.
He said that the NNPCL filed another preliminary objection in June and that they had joined issues with them.
Mr Ibrahim, however, said that the corporation was not represented in court in today’s proceeding.
He, therefore, sought an adjournment to enable the parties regularise their processes.
NMDPRA’s lawyer, I.D. Ahmad, did not oppose the application.
But Basima Terhemba, who announced appearance for the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (FCCPC), via a party seeking to be joined, told the court that the organisation was interested in the case.
He said though the court had earlier dismissed their application to be joined in the suit, the commission had appealed the ruling.
He said, “We applied for a leave to appeal, and it was granted, and an appeal has been filed.’’
The lawyer said the matter touched on the core mandate of FCCPC and if the case was decided without the commission’s involvement, it might not be in their interest.
Responding, Mr Ibrahim said the former judge, in his ruling, held that the FCCPC was not a relevant party, describing the commission as “meddlesome interloper.”
He said the commission headed to the Court of Appeal and sought an order for a stay.
Mr Ibrahim urged the court to proceed with the hearing as the commission’s appeal was with no substance.
Justice Umar agreed that filing the appeal should not stop the matter from being heard.
The judge subsequently adjourned the matter until September 29 for hearing.
He also ordered that hearing notice be issued and served on the defendants.
Dangote Refinery (plaintiff) also prayed the court to declare that NMDPRA was in violation of Sections 317(8) and (9) of the Petroleum Industry Act (PIA) by issuing licences for the importation of petroleum products.
It stated that such licences should only be issued in circumstances where there is a petroleum product shortfall.
It equally sought a 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.
The 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 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 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 one and the same with 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 a Senior Regulatory Officer in the office, Idris Musa, 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 December 13, 2024, said the current production of Dangote Refinery has 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 licences 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 monopoly in the oil and gas sector.
He denied the allegation that NMDPRA was 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, told the court that granting Dangote’s application would spell doom for 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, said 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
Justice Ekwo on March 18, dismissed the NNPCL’s objection against Dangote’s suit
The judge, in the ruling, dismissed the objection on the grounds that the application was 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 raising an objection.
The judge, who also dismissed the NNPCL preliminary objection, challenging the jurisdiction of the court, granted Dangote’s motion to amend its originating motion by correcting the name of the NNPCL.
(NAN)
