The Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (FCCPC) has officially withdrawn its appeal from the Court of Appeal in Abuja, thus bringing to an end to its activities in respect of its ₦100 billion import license and unfair trading dispute against Dangote Petroleum Refinery and Petrochemicals FZE. This followed Dangote Refinery’s withdrawal of its suit at the Federal High Court seeking to set aside the import licenses issued to several oil marketers by the Nigerian Midstream and Downstream Petroleum Regulatory Authority (NMDPRA).
Counsel for the FCCPC, Olanrewaju A. Osinaike, Esq, submitted notice of the withdrawnto the Court of Appeal on August 26, 2025. The Commission explained that with the Dangote refinery having discontinued its case, the foundation of the appeal ceased to exist. Counsel alerted the Court of Appeal panel of the decision, and the respondents had no objection. The appeal was subsequently struck out.
The matter was interesting given the nature of the arguments made by Dangote Refineries. The claim from Dangote refinery was primarily that NMDPRA’s issuance of import licenses to companies, including NNPC Limited, Matrix Petroleum and AA Rano Limited was inconsistent with the Petroleum Industry Act (PIA) perspective of license applications. More technically, Dangote claimed that given its production capacity of 650,000 barrels per day as the primary player in the market, that there was sufficient products to meet local demand, and that licenses being issued in excess of the operators in the country would be harmful to the operations of the Dangote refinery. In addition to asking that the licences be cancelled, Dangote claim was seeking ₦100 billion in damages. In its pursuit of joining a case against Dangote, which stemmed from possible violations of the imports licenses under the Petroleum Industry Act (PIA), the FCCPC stressed that it wanted to ensure market competition could always be preserved while protecting the public interest. The Commission tried to join the case on notice of competition, as the issues raised could disturb the balancing of interest between profitability and competitive pricing in the downstream sector.
Even if the FCCPC objections had been raised earlier in the process, it is still unclear whether all the interest could have been successfully balanced. If the DRC’s application had been successful, then the likelihood is that the competition issues may have become obscured by the new market dominance that would have emerged.
Oladipupo Ige said that it was a relief that the competition issues were not granted the appropriate consideration, as a worst case scenario was much worse than a popular monopoly. Competition is vital for a flourishing economy. The cancellation is a good result for Nigeria’s free market, as Dangote doesn’t need to own an entire industry and increase prices at our expense or stifle new entrants.
With this news, it is one of the latest developments in an ongoing and significant regulatory and commercial battle (i.e. import licensing and environment) arising in connection with the largest single-train refinery in Africa, which has been dogged by extended period of production ramp-up, regulatory constraints and scrutiny from regulators and competitors alike. Earlier in the year, the Federal High Court ruled in favour of the DRC that the NNPC Limited application to stay the lawsuit was entirely unjustified.
Although the import license claim has now been dismissed as at July 2024, the Federal High Court is also expected to convene on September 29, 2025 to formally strike out the matter and to resolve the costs questions. Reports that the dismissal resolves any tensions that might have existed between regulators, marketers and the DRC appear plausible – it might even soften attitudes even further in the collaboration to achieve stabilisation of Nigeria’s downstream petroleum sector.
The court dismissals and the withdrawal of the DRC claim illuminate a more nuanced area of the law – the thinking that informed both parties to walk away illustrates the difficult balance between fostering industrial growth while at the same time ensuring competitive industries are left to compete. Employment losses in downstream industries should not result from the reliance that arises from industrial production, which is essential to industries and is useful for Nigeria’s economy.
The threats that brought on the respective appeals have been dissipated, although as competition legislation evolves the market returns to a more competitive space. Policy makers will continue to consider actions that will protect Nigeria’s refining capacity alongside interests of consumers in a competitive market.