MultiChoice had raised subscription fees by up to 25% on March 1, 2025, citing rising inflation and operational costs
Court Rejects MultiChoice’s Challenge Against FCCPC, Upholds Price-Setting Rights
In a recent ruling, Justice James Omotosho of the Federal High Court in Abuja dismissed a lawsuit by MultiChoice Nigeria, the operator of DStv and GOtv, which contested the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission’s (FCCPC) interference in its subscription price increase.
The judge declared the suit an abuse of court process, noting that a similar case was already under consideration in Lagos State. He advised MultiChoice to address its grievances in the existing proceedings, deeming the Abuja filing improper.
Justice Omotosho clarified that while the FCCPC possesses investigative authority under its enabling Act, it lacks the power to regulate or suspend prices without explicit presidential authorization through a gazetted instrument, which was not provided. He emphasized that Nigeria’s free market economy allows service providers like MultiChoice to determine their prices, with consumers retaining the freedom to accept or reject them.
The court found that the FCCPC’s directive to halt MultiChoice’s price hike violated the company’s right to a fair hearing and appeared to unfairly single out the company. The judge rejected the FCCPC’s assertion that MultiChoice holds a dominant market position, stating that its services are discretionary and not essential to Nigeria’s economy. He warned that regulatory overreach, such as price-fixing attempts, could deter investors and harm economic growth.
MultiChoice had raised subscription fees by up to 25% on March 1, 2025, citing rising inflation and operational costs. The FCCPC’s opposition, including threats of sanctions, sparked the legal dispute. Justice Omotosho criticized the FCCPC for issuing a suspension order before conducting an investigation, describing it as an overstep of its authority.
The judge reiterated that only the President of Nigeria has the authority to regulate prices or establish a price control board, and such powers cannot be assumed by any agency, including the FCCPC, without a formal delegation. The FCCPC’s role in price regulation is limited to advisory functions unless explicitly empowered by the President.
Furthermore, Justice Omotosho noted that any presidential price regulation must apply industry-wide, not target a single entity like MultiChoice. He referenced a 2022 ruling by the Competition and Consumer Protection Tribunal, which affirmed MultiChoice’s right to adjust prices and Nigerians’ freedom to choose alternative pay-TV platforms.
The court also questioned the FCCPC’s focus on MultiChoice, pointing out that other pay-TV and online platforms, such as YouTube, operate without similar scrutiny. Justice Omotosho concluded that while the FCCPC can address anti-competitive practices and consumer protection issues, it lacks the authority to arbitrarily control prices in a free market economy. Read More
