The Federal High Court in Abuja is set to deliver a landmark judgment on May 8 regarding the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission’s (FCCPC) legal action against MultiChoice Nigeria over its controversial subscription price hikes. The case, which has been closely watched by both consumers and service providers, centers around MultiChoice’s decision to increase the prices of its DStv and GOtv packages by up to 25%, starting from March 1, 2025.
The price hike saw DStv Compact jump 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. This increase led to a legal confrontation after the FCCPC issued a directive for MultiChoice to suspend the price adjustment pending a regulatory review. However, the company went ahead with the hike, prompting the FCCPC to take legal action.
During the court proceedings on Thursday, FCCPC’s counsel, Professor J.E. Agbugu, clarified that the legal action was not an attempt to regulate prices, but rather to address alleged exploitative practices and the abuse of market dominance by MultiChoice. Agbugu emphasized that the FCCPC’s primary concern was to protect consumers from unfair business practices, and it was empowered to investigate price increases under Sections 17(e) and 17(f) of the FCCPC Act.
On the other hand, MultiChoice’s lead counsel, N.J. Onigbanjo, argued that Nigeria operates a free-market economy, where service providers are not required to seek regulatory approval before adjusting prices. Onigbanjo also pointed out that MultiChoice had notified the FCCPC about the planned price review in a letter dated February 21, 2025, before the commission issued its suspension order on February 27. Furthermore, he accused the FCCPC of selectively targeting MultiChoice, pointing out that other service providers had also raised their prices due to inflation and rising operational costs.
In response, Agbugu argued that MultiChoice had failed to justify its price hike despite being invited for regulatory discussions. He also dismissed MultiChoice’s reliance on a previous ruling by the Competition and Consumer Protection Tribunal, asserting that such rulings do not set binding precedents for the Federal High Court.
Justice James Omotosho, who presided over the case, struck out an interlocutory injunction previously sought by MultiChoice, ruling that it had been overtaken by events. He also granted the FCCPC an opportunity to regularize its counter-affidavit and raised a broader question about whether the government has the power to impose price controls in a free-market economy to protect consumers. Onigbanjo responded, asserting that only the President has the authority to set price ceilings, and no such directive had been issued.
As both parties await the court’s final judgment, all eyes are on May 8, 2025, when the Federal High Court will deliver its decision on this crucial case that could have far-reaching implications for consumer protection and market regulation in Nigeria.
About The Author
