The Depot and Petroleum Products Marketers Association of Nigeria (DAPPMAN) has opposed a fresh lawsuit filed by Dangote Petroleum Refinery seeking to void fuel import licences granted to oil marketers and the Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited (NNPC Ltd) by the Nigerian Midstream and Downstream Petroleum Regulatory Authority (NMDPRA).
The refinery had recently filed a fresh lawsuit against Nigeria’s Attorney-General, seeking to overturn fuel import licences granted to oil marketers and NNPC Ltd. The new filing before the Federal High Court in Lagos, according to Reuters, asks the court to nullify import licences issued or renewed by the NMDPRA.
Dangote argued that the approvals violate an earlier court order directing all parties to maintain the status quo. In the suit, the refinery contended that licences granted to some marketers this month threaten its operations and run contrary to provisions of the law, which it said only permit fuel imports when domestic supply is insufficient to meet national demand.
Reacting in its statement on Sunday, DAPPMAN described the licences at the centre of the dispute as “the legal instruments through which Nigeria’s fuel supply chain functions.” The association argued that the licences were issued under the Petroleum Industry Act (PIA) by an authority legally empowered to determine supply requirements.
“The news that Dangote Petroleum Refinery has filed a fresh lawsuit seeking to set aside fuel import licences issued by the NMDPRA to marketers and the NNPC demands a clear response from this Association.
The import licences at the centre of this lawsuit are not administrative courtesies. They are the legal instruments through which Nigeria’s fuel supply chain functions. They were issued under a regulatory framework established by the Petroleum Industry Act, by an authority empowered to make exactly this kind of determination,” the statement said.
The association said that the NMDPRA has consistently maintained, correctly, that these licences exist to protect supply security, not to disadvantage any single producer, however large.
DAPPMAN said its member companies have invested billions of naira in depot infrastructure, logistics networks, and compliance systems on the basis that their operating licences are valid, lawful, and durable.
“A legal action designed to retroactively void those licences does not just affect individual businesses; it introduces uncertainty into the entire downstream supply chain at a moment when Nigeria can least afford it.”
Acknowledging the refinery’s right to pursue legal remedies, the association rejected the premise that a private refinery’s commercial interests should override a regulatory authority’s mandate to ensure adequate supply to Nigerian consumers.
“We respect Dangote Petroleum Refinery’s right to pursue legal remedies. What we do not accept is the premise that a private refinery’s commercial interests should override a regulatory authority’s mandate to ensure adequate supply to Nigerian consumers.
“The PIA is clear: import licences may be issued where the regulator determines it necessary. That determination has been made. It has been defended in court before. It should be defended again. Nigeria’s fuel market is not a monopoly waiting to happen. It is a competitive, multi-participant market that has taken years to build and that serves millions of Nigerians every day,” the association said.
DAPPMAN said it will engage legal counsel, coordinating with affected member companies, and making formal representations to the relevant authorities on this matter.
“Our members did not build this industry to watch it be argued out of existence in a courtroom. They built it to serve Nigeria. That is what they will continue to do, and DAPPMAN will stand behind every one of them through this process.
“The downstream sector works because multiple players operate within it. A lawsuit that seeks to reduce the field of players is ultimately a lawsuit against Nigerian consumers,” the association said.
The Case
In September 2024, Dangote Refinery, in suit number FHC/ABJ/CS/1324/2024, requested the Federal High Court in Abuja to award N100 billion in damages against the NMDPRA for issuing import licenses to some marketers and allowing the importation of petroleum products.
The marketers are NNPC Ltd, Matrix Petroleum Services Limited, AYM Shafa Limited, A. A. Rano Limited, T. Time Petroleum Limited, and 2015 Petroleum Limited.
In the suit dated 6 September 2024, the plaintiff’s lawyer, Ogwu Onoja, asked the court to declare that NMDPRA is allegedly in violation of Sections 317(8) and (9) of the Petroleum Industry Act by issuing licenses for the importation of petroleum products.
The refinery said such licenses should only be issued when a petroleum product shortfall exists. The refinery also urged the court to declare that NMDPRA violates its statutory responsibilities under the PIA for not encouraging local refineries.
In a counter affidavit marked FHC/ABJ/CS/1324/2024 dated 5 November 2024, and filed by Ahmed Raji (SAN), the marketers requested that the court dismiss the refinery’s claims, insisting that competitive practices are essential to Nigeria’s economic health and the oil sector’s viability.
They argued that they are fully qualified to receive an import licence from NMDPRA, under Section 317(9) of the PIA. The three defendants claim the plaintiff allegedly seeks to monopolise the petroleum industry in Nigeria, where it alone would control supply, distribution, and pricing.
NMDPRA further clarified that it issued oil licences to NNPC Limited and oil marketers to address petroleum product shortfalls in the country.
In its counter-affidavit, sworn to by Idris Musa, a Senior Regulatory Officer, NMDPRA, argued that the refinery was not entitled to the prayers sought. Mr Musa said the refinery’s production does not meet the national daily consumption requirement.
On 9 December 2024, the plaintiff sought a motion to amend its originating process to correct the name of the second defendant from “Nigeria National Petroleum Corporation Limited” to “Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited.”
READ ALSO: Dangote raises investment in Ethiopia to $4 billion
In response, the second defendant, NNPC Limited, raised a preliminary objection, arguing that the suit was incompetent and should be struck out for misidentification, among other grounds. The objection was supported by an affidavit deposed to by Isiaka Popoola, a litigation clerk in the law firm representing the company.
On 18 March 2025, the then-judge, Inyang Ekwo, dismissed the objection, ruling that the error in name did not render the suit defective. The court also held that the defendants should have responded to the substantive claims before raising procedural objections.
On 19 March 2025, the judge granted the plaintiff’s motion to amend its originating summons and directed parties to proceed on the merits of the case.
In July 2025, the Federal High Court in Abuja fixed 29 September for the hearing of a suit filed.
Judge Mohammed Umar fixed the date after counsel for Dangote Refinery, George Ibrahim (SAN), sought an adjournment to allow parties to regularise their processes.
On 28 July 2025, the refinery withdrew its lawsuit against the NMDPRA, NNPC Ltd, and the five petroleum companies. At the time, the case, filed at the Federal High Court in Abuja with suit number FHC/ABJ/CS/1324/2024, was formally discontinued by the plaintiff’s legal team.
No official reason was given in the filing for the decision to discontinue the case.
In November 2025, the Federal High Court in Abuja dismissed the refinery’s suit. The refinery’s lawyer, C. O. Adegbe, urged the court to terminate the case on the grounds of the refinery’s decision to withdraw it.
