Price Hike: Court throws out MultiChoice’s suit against FCCPC

The Federal High Court in Abuja has dismissed the suit filed by MultiChoice Nigeria, the operators of DStv and GOtv, which challenged the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (FCCPC) over its intervention in the company’s recent subscription fee increase.

Delivering judgment, Justice James Omotosho ruled that the case was an abuse of court process, noting that similar proceedings were already pending before a court in Lagos.

He emphasized that MultiChoice ought to have pursued its claims in the already existing matter, rendering the fresh suit improper.

The court acknowledged that the FCCPC does have the authority to investigate market behavior, but clarified that it “cannot impose price controls without proper legal backing.”

Justice Omotosho stressed that such authority can only be exercised if expressly delegated by the President of Nigeria through a formal and gazetted instrument.

No such delegation was presented in this case.

He reiterated that Nigeria runs a free market economy, and companies like MultiChoice are permitted to set their own prices, while consumers retain the right to accept or reject those services.

The court held that FCCPC’s actions—such as directing MultiChoice to halt the price increase—violated the company’s right to fair hearing and appeared selectively enforced.

The judge dismissed FCCPC’s claim that MultiChoice held a dominant market position, describing it as unsupported. He added that pay-TV services are non-essential and discretionary, meaning Nigerians are not obligated to use them.

Further, Justice Omotosho warned that regulatory overreach, especially in the form of unauthorized price control, could deter investors and harm the broader economy.

He noted that FCCPC, as a federal agency, must operate within its statutory limits.

While acknowledging FCCPC’s role in declaring market dominance or detecting discriminatory pricing, he held that the Commission must first conduct a formal investigation before issuing such directives. In this case, the FCCPC acted prematurely.

According to the court, “Nigeria operates a free market economy, where only the President… has the exclusive powers to regulate prices and to set up a price control board…

“Therefore, FCCPC’s attempt to regulate MultiChoice’s pricing was beyond its jurisdiction.”

The judge stated that the Commission’s role in price control is only advisory, unless it is specifically empowered by the President through a legal instrument.

Justice Omotosho affirmed that, as a private company operating under a free market system, MultiChoice’s subscription fees cannot be arbitrarily restricted except through a presidential directive compliant with applicable laws.

He added that any presidential price control must apply to an entire industry, not just a single operator.

While the FCCPC may develop regulations on anti-competition and consumer protection issues, its mandate does not extend to price fixing.

Justice Omotosho also referenced a 2022 ruling by the Competition and Consumer Protection Tribunal, which upheld MultiChoice’s right to increase prices, stating that Nigerians were free to choose among various pay-TV options.

The judge concluded that FCCPC appeared to be unfairly targeting MultiChoice, while failing to scrutinize the pricing strategies of other providers such as other pay-TV platforms and online services like YouTube.