The Federal High Court in Abuja has dismissed the suit filed by MultiChoice Nigeria Limited challenging regulatory pushback against its recent DStv and GOtv price hikes.
Justice James Omotosho ruled on Thursday that the case amounted to an abuse of court process, noting that MultiChoice was already aware of a pending similar suit filed by lawyer Festus Onifade before it filed its own.
The court held that MultiChoice should have addressed its grievances in the earlier suit already before the court.
Justice Omotosho clarified that while the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (FCCPC) can investigate anti-competitive behavior and market dominance, it does not have the power to suspend or reverse price increases without first completing a proper investigation.
The court noted that only the President of Nigeria, under the law, has the authority to regulate or fix prices, and even then, such actions must apply to the entire industry, not just a single company like MultiChoice.
The court noted the FCCPC acted outside its powers by issuing directives to halt MultiChoice’s price hike before conducting an investigation.
Despite siding with MultiChoice on the broader economic issue—that Nigeria operates a free-market economy—the court dismissed the company’s suit on procedural grounds.
The judge emphasized that regulatory bodies must work within their defined legal boundaries and respect due process.
Recall that MultiChoice had announced subscription hikes effective March 1, 2025, citing inflation. This triggered consumer backlash and regulatory scrutiny. The FCCPC summoned MultiChoice and warned of sanctions, prompting the pay-TV giant to seek judicial protection from enforcement actions.
Justice Omotosho reaffirmed that while businesses like MultiChoice have the right to set prices in a free-market economy, legal channels must be properly followed.
He emphasized that unilateral regulatory intervention without thorough investigation threatens investor confidence and is outside the FCCPC’s scope—yet MultiChoice’s case still failed due to improper filing.
