Court Dismisses Dangote’s Suit Against NMDPRA, NNPC Ltd, Others

The Federal High Court sitting in Abuja, presided over by Justice Mohammed G. Umar, on Wednesday dismissed the suit filed by Dangote Petroleum Refinery and Petrochemicals FZE against the Nigerian Midstream and Downstream Petroleum Regulatory Authority, Nigeria National Petroleum Company Limited (NNPC Ltd) and five others.

The dismissal was sequel to a notice of discontinuance filed by Dangote Refinery and Petrochemicals FZE, after all parties in the suit had joined issues.

It will be recalled that Dangote Refinery had filed the suit in August 2024, urging the court to stop NMDPRA from further issuance of import licenses and from imposing 0.5% levies on imported products.

Dangote Refinery sought N100 billion against the NMDPRA for issuing fuel import licences to NNPC Ltd and oil marketers, despite that no shortfall in petroleum products supply was declared in the country.

The suit also sought a declaration that Dangote is exempt from all Federal, State and Local government taxes.

Other defendants in the suit include the NNPC Ltd, AYM Shafa Limited, A.A. Rano Limited, T. Time Petroleum Limited, 2015 Petroleum Limited and Matrix Petroleum Services Limited.

But the judge dismissed the suit after the refinery’s lawyer applied for its withdrawal.

The plaintiff, through its lawyer, C. O. Adegbe, informed the court that it filed the notice for the discontinuation of the suit on 28 July.

She informed the court that the plaintiff had agreed with the defendants that the matter should be struck out.

NMDPRA’s lawyer, I. B. Ahmad, did not oppose the application. However, after acknowledging receipt of the notice of discontinuance, he urged the court not to strike the case out but to dismiss it entirely.

Also, Chris Ekemezie, who appeared for the third, fourth and seventh defendants (AYM Shafa Limited, A. A. Rano Limited and Matrix Petroleum Services Limited), urged the court to dismiss the suit.

Ekemezie cited Supreme Court and Court of Appeal precedents and said that where such an application is made, the proper step is dismissal, not a mere striking out.

“In law, when a case is struck out, it can be refiled before the same court. But when it is dismissed, it cannot be refiled unless overturned on appeal,” he said.

He further stated that the parties had already filed and adopted their final written addresses ahead of judgment, only for the plaintiff to withdraw its case at the stage of proceedings.

He alleged that “it seems what the plaintiff plans to do is to go and panel beat its case and come back. So we urge my lord to dismiss it,” he added.

Similarly, the lawyer to the fifth and sixth defendants (T. Time Petroleum Limited and 2015 Petroleum Limited), Mofesomo Tayo-Oyetibo, a Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN), did not oppose the withdrawal and aligned himself with the submissions of other defence lawyers.

But Ms Adegbe disagreed with the defence lawyers’ request for dismissal. She reiterated that her client had agreed with the defendants that the matter should be struck out.

After listening to their arguments, the judge dismissed the suit.

The judge ruled: “The case on record is that parties have joined issues, and what remains is for parties to adopt their processes. It is at this stage that the plaintiff came for a withdrawal.” The judge said, adding that the matter is deemed for dismissal and cost,” But since “cost is not asked for, the matter is hereby dismissed.”