Dangote Petroleum Refinery and Petrochemicals has officially withdrawn its legal action against the Nigerian Midstream and Downstream Petroleum Regulatory Authority (NMDPRA), the Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited (NNPCL), and several oil marketers over the issuance of petroleum import licences.
In a notice of discontinuance filed at the Federal High Court in Abuja and signed by the refinery’s counsel, Ogwu Onoja (SAN), the company stated,
“Take notice that the plaintiff herein discontinues this suit against the defendants forthwith.”
No reason was provided for the decision to terminate the proceedings.
Previously, in an originating summons marked FHC/ABJ/CS/1324/2024 dated September 6, 2024, the refinery challenged the legality of import permits issued by the NMDPRA to NNPCL, AYM Shafa Limited, A. A. Rano Limited, T. Time Petroleum Limited, 2015 Petroleum Limited, and Matrix Petroleum Services Limited.
Dangote Refinery argued that the permits breached Sections 317(8) and (9) of the Petroleum Industry Act (PIA), which allow for product importation only in the case of a supply shortfall.
The company also accused NMDPRA of failing in its statutory duty to promote domestic refining and sought N100 billion in damages.
Three of the oil marketers—AYM Shafa, A. A. Rano, and Matrix Petroleum Services—filed a counter-affidavit dated November 5, 2024, through their counsel, Ahmed Raji (SAN), urging the court to dismiss the case. They argued that Dangote’s demands were an attempt to dominate the market.
According to the marketers, “Granting Dangote Refinery’s application would be detrimental to Nigeria’s oil sector.”
They warned it could lead to a monopoly, “The plaintiff aimed to monopolise the oil sector, allowing it sole control of supply, distribution, and pricing—an arrangement they described as a recipe for disaster.”
They maintained that they met the requirements under Section 317(9) of the PIA to receive import permits and argued, “Relying solely on Dangote Refinery as the producer and supplier of petroleum products would lead to continued price increases and jeopardise energy security.”
The NMDPRA, in a counter-affidavit deposed to by a Senior Regulatory Officer, Idris Musa, emphasized that the refinery’s current production could not satisfy Nigeria’s daily consumption needs. The agency said it acted within the law by issuing licences to marketers with proven international trading records to bridge supply gaps.
The Authority stated:, “The agency is mandated to promote competition and prevent monopolies,” and denied any alleged conspiracy against the plaintiff.
It added that, “Issuing multiple licences ensures fair competition, prevents abuse of dominant positions, and avoids monopolistic practices in the oil and gas sector.”
NMDPRA also noted that Dangote Refinery’s products are not restricted to Nigeria and could be sold internationally.
In a separate preliminary objection, NNPCL, represented by Kehinde Ogunwumiju (SAN), challenged the suit on the basis of misidentification and claimed Dangote lacked the locus standi to bring the case. The objection, however, was dismissed by Justice Inyang Ekwo, who ruled that the naming error did not render the suit invalid and granted Dangote’s motion to amend the originating summons on March 19.
The matter had been slated for hearing on September 29 before Justice Mohammed Umar prior to the withdrawal.
