In a decisive ruling, Justice James Omotosho of the Federal High Court, Abuja, dismissed MultiChoice Nigeria’s lawsuit against the FCCPC ’s intervention in its recent price hike.
The judge declared the suit an abuse of court process since a similar case was already pending in Lagos.
He stressed that MultiChoice should have pursued its arguments there instead of filing a new case.
Justice Omotosho acknowledged the FCCPC’s investigative powers but clarified that the Commission cannot set or suspend prices without presidential authorization.
He emphasized Nigeria’s free-market economy, where companies like MultiChoice can determine pricing while consumers retain the choice to accept or reject services.
The judge ruled that the FCCPC’s suspension order violated MultiChoice’s right to a fair hearing and appeared unfairly targeted.
Additionally, the court rejected the FCCPC’s claim that MultiChoice held a dominant market position, stating that pay TV services are non-essential.
Justice Omotosho warned that arbitrary price controls could discourage investment and harm the economy.
While regulators can investigate market practices, they cannot impose price restrictions without legal justification.
MultiChoice had raised subscription fees by 25% in March 2025, citing inflation and operational costs.
The FCCPC opposed the hike, demanding a review and threatening penalties, which led to MultiChoice’s legal challenge.
Justice Omotosho reiterated that the FCCPC must operate within its legal limits, noting that any declaration of market dominance requires prior investigation—which did not occur here.
The judge affirmed that only Nigeria’s President can regulate prices or delegate such authority through an official gazette.
He also stated that price controls must apply industry-wide, not selectively.
Criticizing the FCCPC’s approach, he highlighted that other platforms like YouTube faced no similar scrutiny.
This ruling aligns with a 2022 tribunal decision upholding MultiChoice’s pricing freedom while recognizing consumers’ right to alternatives.
Justice Omotosho concluded that private companies in a free-market system cannot have prices restricted without presidential intervention under existing laws.
The judgment reinforces regulatory boundaries while safeguarding business autonomy.
Post Views: 52
