Hearing in a suit filed by Dangote Petroleum Refinery and Petrochemicals FZE over a bid to stop the issuance of oil import licences to some oil marketing companies suffered a setback on Monday at the Abuja Division of the Federal High Court.
The matter, which was scheduled for hearing before Justice Inyang Ekwo, could not proceed due to Dangote Refinery’s delay in serving its amended originating summons on the defendants.
Dangote Refinery had sued NMDPRA and Nigeria National Petroleum Corporation Limited (NNPCL) as the first and second defendants.
Also joined as the third to seventh defendants, respectively, in the originating summons, marked FHC/ABJ/CS/1324/2024 and dated September 6, are AYM Shafa Limited, A. A. Rano Limited, T. Time Petroleum Limited, 2015 Petroleum Limited, and Matrix Petroleum Services Limited.
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 to import refined petroleum products.
The company (plaintiff) also prayed the court to declare that NMDPRA violated sections 317(8) and (9) of the Petroleum Industry Act (PIA) by issuing licences for the importation of petroleum products.
It stated that such licenses should only be issued in circumstances where there is a petroleum product shortfall.
It equally sought 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.
When the matter was called, George Ibrahim, who appeared for the plaintiff (Dangote), informed the court that the matter was fixed for a report of settlement or a report of service.
However, Mr Ibrahim said they had been unable to take steps to effect service of the processes and that reconciliation issues had also not been looked into because of a motion filed to amend their originating summons due to the error discovered in the earlier application.
He said the application was dated November 25, 2024, and filed November 28, 2024.
Counsel to NMDPRA, Mathew Bukar (SAN); lawyer to the third, fourth, and seventh defendants (AYM Shafa, A.A. Rano Limited, and Matrix Limited), Ahmed Raji (SAN); and that of the fifth and sixth defendants (T. Time Petroleum and 2015 Petroleum Limited), Divine Oguru, told the court that they were yet to be served with the plaintiff’s application.
But Ademola Abimbola, who appeared for NNPCL (second defendant), said he was only served with the application at about 9:00 a.m. before the court began sitting.
Mr Abimbola said Dangote Refinery served them with the amended originating summons because they objected that the second defendant should not have been a party in the suit since its registered name was not what it was sued with.
The lawyer, who said the plaintiff amended the suit because it was already in the media, noted that the application would be studied for an appropriate response.
“You have not been able to position this matter to be heard, and that is the cause of the adjournment,” Mr Ekwo told the lawyer to Dangote.
The judge, who advised a counsel representing the party seeking to be joined, Olanrewaju Oshinaike, to wait until the processes were regularised, adjourned the matter until January 30 for motion.
NMDPRA, in its counter affidavit deposed to by Idris Musa, a senior regulatory officer in the office, prayed the court to dismiss the suit as it was misconceived, unmeritorious, and incompetent.
Mr Musa argued that Dangote Refinery is not entitled to any reliefs sought.
The official, in the application dated and filed December 13, 2024, said the current production of Dangote Refinery is yet to meet the national daily petroleum product sufficiency requirement.
He said that 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 product trading.
Besides, he said the agency is mandated to promote competition and prevent abuse of dominant market positions and unhealthy monopolies in the oil and gas sector.
He denied that NMDPRA is 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 NNPCL, in its preliminary objection dated and filed November 15, 2024, also prayed the court to strike out the case for being incompetent.
Also, in a joint counter affidavit filed on November 5, 2024, the oil marketers 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.
In their response, the three marketers, AYM Shafa Limited, A. A. Rano Limited, and Matrix Petroleum Services Limited, said the plaintiff did not produce adequate petroleum products for the daily consumption of Nigerians.
Besides, they argued that nothing was placed before the court to prove the contrary.
(NAN)
