The Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited (NNPCL) on Thursday legally blocked Dangote Petroleum Refinery and Petrochemicals FZE from amending its import license lawsuit against NNPCL, Matrix Petroleum Services Limited, A.A. Rano Limited, and four other companies.
Dangote Refinery’s legal team had sought to amend the suit to correct a “clerical spelling” error, but the request could not be heard during proceedings at the Federal High Court in Abuja due to NNPCL’s insistence on resolving its preliminary objection first.
Nairametrics previously reported that Dangote Petroleum Refinery and Petrochemicals FZE had filed a suit seeking to void import licenses issued to NNPCL, Matrix Petroleum Services Limited, A.A. Rano Limited, and four other companies for importing refined petroleum products.
The refinery argues that these products are already being produced domestically without shortfalls.
In suit number FHC/ABJ/CS/1324/2024, Nairametrics reported that Dangote Refinery is seeking N100 billion in damages against the Nigerian Midstream and Downstream Petroleum Regulatory Authority (NMDPRA) for allegedly continuing to issue import licenses to NNPCL, Matrix, and other companies for importing petroleum products such as Automotive Gas Oil (AGO) and Jet Fuel (aviation turbine fuel) into Nigeria.
What Transpired in Previous Proceedings
Dangote Refinery’s suit claims that the practice of importing petroleum products persists “despite the production of AGO and Jet-A1 that exceeds the current daily consumption of petroleum products in Nigeria by the Dangote Refinery.”
- The defendants in the case include: NMDPRA, NNPCL, Aym Shafa Limited, A.A. Rano Limited, T. Time Petroleum Limited,2015 Petroleum Limited, and Matrix Petroleum Services Limited.
- In its originating summons dated September 6, 2024, seen by Nairametrics, the plaintiff’s lawyer, George Ibrahim, SAN, argued that NMDPRA allegedly violated Sections 317(8) and (9) of the Petroleum Industry Act by issuing import licenses for petroleum products, which should only be granted when there is a proven shortfall in supply.
- Days after the suit was filed and adjourned, three oil companies—Matrix Petroleum Services Limited, A.A. Rano Limited, and AYM Shafa Limited—filed a motion urging the court to dismiss the suit.
- They argued that only the NMDPRA and NNPCL are legally empowered to determine petroleum product shortfalls in Nigeria, not Dangote Refinery.
- In their counter-affidavit dated November 5, 2024, attached to a written address seen by Nairametrics, the companies, through Ahmed Raji, SAN, sought an order prohibiting NMDPRA from reviewing or withdrawing their import licenses.
Meanwhile, NNPCL’s counsel, Ademola Abimbola, SAN, filed a preliminary objection, arguing that the plaintiff erroneously sued “Nigeria National Petroleum Corporation“, a non-existent entity, instead of the correctly registered “Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited.”
Consequently, Dangote Refinery applied for leave to amend the suit to correct the name of the second defendant.
What Transpired in Court
At the resumed hearing on Monday, George Ibrahim, SAN, informed the court that he was ready to move the amended suit, which seeks to correct the clerical error in the originating summons.
- However, Abimbola, NNPCL’s counsel, drew the court’s attention to his counter-affidavit and preliminary objection.
“OWe contendthat the court cannot grant the application to amend. Until my preliminary objection is determined, the court cannot amend,” he said.
- He emphasised that his preliminary objection was based on jurisdictional issues, including the use of the wrong name in the lawsuit, and noted that Dangote Refinery was yet to formally respond.
- On his part, Ibrahim requested a stand-down for a few hours to allow him to file a formal response to the preliminary objection.
“We have not filed a formal process in response to the preliminary objection,” Ibrahim said when the judge asked whether a formal response had been filed.
However, Ibrahim also contended that he could address the court orally, citing points of law to convince the judge to dismiss the preliminary objection without needing a written response.
- Responding to both parties, Justice Ekwo acknowledged that although the motion for amendment was scheduled for hearing, the court had been notified that NNPCL had filed a preliminary objection related to the amendment request.
- Ekwo noted that Dangote Refinery’s legal team had yet to formally respond to NNPCL’s objection, making it necessary for the court to adjourn the matter.
“The plaintiff (Dangote Refinery) is hereby granted two days to respond to the preliminary objection, while the respondents are granted one day to reply,” the court ruled.
The matter was subsequently adjourned to February 5, 2025, for the preliminary objection to be heard.
What You Should Know
Africa’s richest man, Aliko Dangote, recently announced his willingness to sell his multibillion-dollar refinery to NNPCL amid escalating disputes with regulators and equity partners.
Dangote had previously accused other importers of bringing substandard petroleum products into Nigeria.
Nairametrics reported that the federal government later allowed marketers to purchase petroleum products directly from Dangote Refinery, following NNPCL’s decision to withdraw as a middleman between the refinery and marketers.
