The Federal High Court in Abuja has scheduled May 8, 2025, to deliver judgment in the legal dispute between the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (FCCPC) and MultiChoice Nigeria over the company’s recent subscription price hike.
During Thursday’s proceedings, FCCPC’s counsel, Prof. J.E. Agbugu, clarified that the commission’s legal action was not aimed at regulating prices but at addressing alleged exploitative practices and market dominance abuse.
This followed arguments from MultiChoice’s lead counsel, N.J. Onigbanjo, who maintained that Nigeria operates a free-market economy where service providers are not obligated to seek regulatory approval before adjusting prices.
Background of the Case
The dispute arose after MultiChoice Nigeria increased its DStv and GOtv subscription fees by up to 25% starting March 1, 2025, citing inflation and rising operational costs. The price adjustments saw DStv Compact move from ₦15,700 to ₦19,000, Compact Plus from ₦25,000 to ₦30,000, Premium from ₦37,000 to ₦44,500, and GOtv Supa Plus from ₦15,700 to ₦16,800.
In response, the FCCPC directed MultiChoice to suspend the price increase pending regulatory review. However, the company proceeded with the adjustments, prompting the legal battle now before Justice James Omotosho.
Legal Arguments
Onigbanjo argued that the FCCPC lacks the authority to regulate prices, emphasizing that only the President has the power to impose price ceilings, and no such directive had been issued. He also disclosed that MultiChoice had formally notified the FCCPC of the intended price adjustments in a letter dated February 21, 2025—before the commission’s suspension directive on February 27.
Furthermore, he revealed that MultiChoice had filed a lawsuit on March 3 to challenge the directive, but the FCCPC responded with a letter threatening prosecution over the price hike. He also accused the FCCPC of singling out MultiChoice while other service providers had implemented similar price adjustments due to economic pressures.
In defense, Agbugu insisted that the FCCPC, under Sections 17(e) and 17(f) of its Act, has the power to investigate price increases and protect consumers from unfair business practices. He also argued that MultiChoice failed to justify its price hike despite being invited for regulatory discussions.
Additionally, Agbugu dismissed MultiChoice’s reliance on a previous ruling by the Competition and Consumer Protection Tribunal, stating that the tribunal does not have the authority to set binding precedents for the Federal High Court.
Court Proceedings and Adjournment
During the session, Justice Omotosho struck out an interlocutory injunction previously sought by MultiChoice, ruling that it had been overtaken by events. The court also granted an oral application allowing the FCCPC to regularize its counter-affidavit.
Raising a broader issue, Justice Omotosho questioned whether the government has the power to impose price controls in a free-market economy to protect consumers.
After hearing arguments from both sides, the court adjourned the case until May 8, 2025, for judgment.
