Court Rejects Multichoice's Challenge, Backs FCCPC in Tariff Increase Dispute
On Thursday, at the Federal High Court located in Abuja, a lawsuit submitted by MultiChoice Nigeria Limited was dismissed. This case aimed to contest the involvement of the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (FCCPC) regarding the recent hike in DStv and Gotv subscription charges.
The court, through Judge James Omotosho’s ruling, determined that the lawsuit represented an misuse of judicial proceedings because the identical issue is currently under consideration in another courtroom.
The decision stated that the plaintiff should have presented their concerns about the FCCPC to that court rather than pursuing multiple legal proceedings.
However, Justice Omotosho criticized the FCCPC, pointing out that even though its Establishing Act gave it investigatory power, it does not have the authority to set or suspend prices without specific delegation from the President via a published decree.
The presiding judge pointed out that no such document was presented to the court.
"The authority to set prices rests solely with the president. Any choice made without this authorization is invalid," the court further stated.
Furthermore, it highlighted that Nigeria has a free-market economy, allowing service providers such as MultiChoice to maintain the authority to determine their own pricing. In this system, consumers have the liberty to choose whether they will accept or decline these prices.
The court additionally determined that the FCCPC's moves, such as instructing MultiChoice to halt its proposed price hike, violated the firm's entitlement to due process, suggesting selective targeting.
The commission similarly rejected FCCPC's argument that MultiChoice dominated the market as being unfeasible.
"The utilization of services such as those offered by the plaintiff remains optional rather than indispensable. Nigeria could manage without them," stated Justice Omotosho, cautioning that efforts by regulatory agencies to set prices might deter potential investors and adversely affect the country’s economy.
The court stated that although the FCCPC can look into market behaviors, it has no authority to enforce price regulations unless backed by appropriate legislation.
It should be remembered that on February 27, the FCCPC instructed MultiChoice to keep their previous pricing model for DStv and GOtv, until they completed their review of the suggested hike in subscription charges.
Despite the directive, the company went ahead with the price increase on March 1. Even as it headed towards the High Court, it requested the court to prevent the FCCPC from penalizing it for the tariff hike.
On March 12, the court issued a ruling that imposed an interim injunction, preventing the FCCPC from taking any actions against the company until the final resolution of its lawsuit.
Although MultiChoice, with its group of attorneys headed by Mr. Moyosore Onigbanjo, SAN, requested the court to validate their authority to set prices for their offerings, the FCCPC, supported by its legal counsel led by Mr. J.E.O. Abugu,SAN, implored the judiciary to rule that the prerequisite for such a price hike had not been fulfilled.
The FCCPC charged MultiChoice with intentionally eroding its regulatory power, asserting that their choice to ignore its guidance was a deliberate move aimed at "destabilizing fair competition and depriving Nigerian consumers of the legal protections they are entitled to."
"By disregarding the FCCPC's directive and implementing the price hike before appearing before the Commission's investigative hearing on March 6, 2025, MultiChoice has not only flouted regulatory processes but also demonstrated a pattern of conduct that undermines consumer rights and fair competition.
"The Commission also mentioned that alongside these legal proceedings, the FCCPC is evaluating additional enforcement steps such as sanctions, fines, and regulatory interventions to guarantee adherence and responsibility," they stated.
Later, it submitted a lawsuit with three counts against MultiChoice and its CEO, John Ugbe, at the Federal High Court in Lagos. The claim asserted that the actions of the defendants were in violation of and subject to punishment under Sections 33(3), 110, and 159 of the FCCPC Act 2018.
In its lawsuit, MultiChoice requested the court to, amongst other requests, grant an order prohibiting the Commission and its officials from implementing any additional directives or undertaking actions likely to disrupt their operational activities until the hearing and ruling on the application for an interim injunction.
In addition, "A temporary restraining order halting the FCCPC, along with its representatives, employees, or associates, from imposing any sanctions or penalties on MultiChoice (the petitioner) concerning their price hike until the hearing and decision regarding the application for a preliminary injunction."
Provided by Syndigate Media Inc. ( Syndigate.info ).
