The matter, which was slated for hearing, could not proceed as Justice Umar was reportedly sitting at the court’s Enugu division. The case, which has drawn significant industry attention, revolves around Dangote’s challenge to the legality of oil import licences granted by the Nigerian Midstream and Downstream Petroleum Regulatory Authority (NMDPRA) to NNPCL and five major oil marketing firms.
Justice Umar had earlier directed all parties to regularise their filings and ensure that hearing notices were duly served on all defendants ahead of the substantive hearing. The suit, previously handled by Justice Inyang Ekwo, is now being heard de novo following its reassignment.
At the centre of the dispute, Dangote Refinery, through its counsel Ogwu Onoja (SAN), is asking the court to invalidate the import licences issued to NNPCL and five marketers — AYM Shafa Ltd, A. A. Rano Ltd, T. Time Petroleum Ltd, 2015 Petroleum Ltd, and Matrix Petroleum Services Ltd — arguing that the NMDPRA violated Sections 317(8) and (9) of the Petroleum Industry Act (PIA) by allowing the importation of refined products when no domestic shortfall has been declared.
The refinery also seeks ₦100 billion in damages against the NMDPRA for allegedly undermining its operations through continued issuance of import licences to competitors.
However, NNPCL, in its preliminary objection, asked the court to dismiss the case, contending that the entity sued by Dangote — “Nigeria National Petroleum Corporation Limited” — does not legally exist. An affidavit filed by Afe Babalola & Co., NNPCL’s counsel, stated that a search of the Corporate Affairs Commission database showed no record of such a company, arguing that the court lacked jurisdiction to entertain the suit.
Similarly, the NMDPRA urged the court to dismiss the case, maintaining that Dangote Refinery has yet to achieve sufficient production capacity to meet national demand. The agency said it issued import licences to credible traders in line with the PIA’s mandate to bridge product shortfalls, encourage competition, and prevent market monopolies.
In their joint response, the oil marketers warned that granting Dangote’s request would create a monopoly and destabilise the country’s fuel supply chain. They argued that the refinery has not demonstrated it can meet Nigeria’s consumption needs, insisting that continued importation is essential for market stability.
The legal battle had earlier seen Justice Ekwo dismiss an objection by NNPCL in March, ruling that the company’s challenge was incompetent and that it should have first filed a counter-affidavit before contesting jurisdiction.
As the case resumes on November 5, stakeholders in the oil and gas sector are closely watching for a ruling that could shape the future of Nigeria’s downstream petroleum market and the competitive landscape emerging around the new Dangote Refinery.