In the legal documents filed by its legal team, led by Mr. Kehinde Ogunwumiju, SAN, the NNPCL characterized the lawsuit brought by Dangote Refinery as lacking merit, arguing that it aims to nullify its license for importing refined petroleum products into Nigeria.
The plaintiff, Dangote Refinery, has raised concerns regarding the appropriateness of permitting the NNPCL and other significant oil marketers to import refined petroleum products, especially given that there has been no reported shortfall in its own production capabilities.
The defendants in the case, referenced as FHC/ABJ/CS/1324/2024, include the Nigeria Midstream and Downstream Petroleum Regulatory Authority (NMDPRA), the NNPC, and several major oil marketers such as AYM Shafa Limited, A. A. Rano Limited, and Matrix Petroleum Services Limited.
According to the plaintiff, the NMDPRA has violated Sections 317(8) and (9) of the Petroleum Industry Act (PIA) by granting import licenses to the defendants. The plaintiff contends that these licenses were issued despite the Dangote Refinery's production of Automotive Gas Oil (AGO) and Jet-A1 exceeding the current daily demand for petroleum products in Nigeria.
Consequently, the plaintiff is seeking N100 billion in damages from the NMDPRA for allegedly continuing to issue import licenses to the NNPCL and other defendants for importing petroleum products, including AGO and Jet Fuel. Additionally, Dangote Refinery has requested a court order to prevent the NMDPRA from issuing or renewing import licenses for the defendants or any other companies involved in the importation of petroleum products.
The plaintiff sought a court order requiring the 1st defendant to secure all tank farms, storage facilities, warehouses, and stations utilized by the defendants for the storage of refined petroleum products imported into Nigeria. Additionally, the plaintiff requested a mandatory injunction compelling the 1st defendant to immediately revoke all import licenses granted to the 2nd through 7th defendants and any other companies, excluding the plaintiff and local refineries, for the importation of refined petroleum products into Nigeria. Furthermore, the plaintiff sought an injunction preventing the 1st defendant from imposing a 0.5% levy on petroleum product off-takers and an additional 0.5% wholesale levy in favor of MDGIF or any other charges against the plaintiff.
In response, the NNPCL argued that the lawsuit was premature and questioned the court's jurisdiction to hear the case. Alternatively, the NNPCL requested that its name be removed from the suit, asserting that the plaintiff lacked the legal standing to pursue such claims against it. The NNPCL contended that the plaintiff's case was premature, failed to establish a cause of action, and that the 2nd defendant was not a proper party to the proceedings.
It further claimed that the court lacked jurisdiction to adjudicate the matter, emphasizing that the Dangote Refinery had initiated legal action against a non-existent entity. The NNPCL pointed out that the court documents identified the Nigeria National Petroleum Corporation Limited (NNPC) as a defendant, despite the fact that a search on the CAC website revealed no existing entity by that name.
The argument presented stated that NNPCL, which filed the objection, is distinct from NNPC, asserting that the entity named as a defendant in the case is a non-juristic person. It is important to note that the three primary oil marketers also named as defendants in the lawsuit—AYM Shafa Limited, A. A. Rano Limited, and Matrix Petroleum Services Limited—previously requested the court to dismiss the case.
They claimed that the actions of Dangote Refinery represent an attempt to monopolize Nigeria's energy sector. The marketers contended that permitting the plaintiff to dominate the oil industry would have dire consequences for the nation. The defendants informed the court of their qualifications and rights to receive a license from the first defendant to import petroleum products into Nigeria, as outlined in Section 317(9) of the PIA.
They argued that granting the plaintiff monopolistic control over Nigeria's petroleum sector, as sought through this legal action, would undermine competitive pricing of petroleum products, exacerbate the already struggling Nigerian economy, and impose significant hardships on the populace, creating a potential crisis for the nation.
Justice Inyang Ekwo has previously postponed the case until January 20, 2025, to allow the parties to consider an out-of-court resolution, with the plaintiff indicating a willingness to withdraw the lawsuit.