The Federal High Court in Abuja’s order directing the Nigerian Midstream and Downstream Petroleum Regulatory Authority to continue granting and renewing petroleum products import licences has opened a fresh battle over fuel imports as domestic refining capacity expands.

The ruling has put the court’s decision in Abuja alongside a pending suit by Dangote Petroleum Refinery at the Federal High Court in Lagos, where the refinery is challenging the continued issuance and renewal of petroleum product import licences.

While petroleum marketers have welcomed the Abuja judgment and called for continued access to import licences, the development has also renewed debate over whether domestic refineries should be protected from import competition and whether the Petroleum Industry Act provides an adequate framework for the changing market.

The marketers, under the Petroleum Products Retail Outlets Owners Association of Nigeria and the Independent Petroleum Marketers Association of Nigeria, said competition between local refiners and importers could improve petrol availability and affordability for Nigerians.

This follows the issuance of import licences that have allowed the importation of an average of 95.7 million litres of petrol per day, translating to a total of 23.2 billion litres between January and August 2026.

Justice Ekwo, in his judgment, held that the regulator’s refusal to issue or renew the import licences of the three oil marketers was in “direct non-compliance” with the Petroleum Industry Act, 2021.

The judge held that the NMDPRA had acted beyond the provisions of the law in its handling of the companies’ applications for import licences. He said the consequence of non-compliance with the PIA and other relevant laws was that any exercise by the regulator in respect of the import licences would be “null and void.”

The three oil marketers had approached the court seeking declarations that the PIA did not prohibit the importation of petroleum products into Nigeria or prevent the NMDPRA from granting or renewing licences for eligible importers.

They also argued that the regulator was required to promote competition in the midstream and downstream petroleum sectors.

Justice Ekwo agreed with the plaintiffs, holding that relevant provisions of the PIA, read together with Section 72 of the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Act, imposed an obligation on the NMDPRA to promote a competitive market and prevent abuse of dominant positions and restrictive business practices.

The judge declared that the three companies were entitled to the issuance, extension or renewal of petroleum products import licences upon fulfilling the conditions stipulated by the NMDPRA.

Specifically, the court ordered the regulator to “continue to grant, issue, extend, renew, or reissue” licences, permits and authorisations for midstream and downstream petroleum operations, particularly those relating to the importation of petroleum products.

The order, however, was subject to the companies fulfilling all applicable statutory and regulatory preconditions. The plaintiffs’ case was based on the alleged refusal of the NMDPRA to regularly issue or renew their petroleum products import licences.

In an affidavit, the Executive Director of A.A. Rano Nigeria Limited, Sabiu Saidu Mahuta, alleged that since July 2025, the regulator had granted or renewed the companies’ import licences only sporadically.

He argued that the situation was contributing to market dominance and monopolisation of the downstream petroleum sector by local refineries. The companies also told the court that they had collectively invested more than $20bn in infrastructure, logistics and retail networks for their petroleum products businesses.

Their counsel, Raji Ahmed, SAN, argued that allowing both imports and local production would promote competition, check monopoly and price-fixing, and improve the midstream and downstream petroleum sector.

The Abuja ruling is coming even as the Dangote refinery has a pending suit praying the court to stop the NMDPRA from issuing import licences to the Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited and other marketers.

The Federal High Court in Lagos had in June fixed October 7 to hear a suit filed by the Dangote refinery challenging the Federal Government’s issuance of fuel import licences to NNPC and several petroleum marketers.

The Dangote refinery, in suit No. FHC/L/CS/857/2026, is requesting the court to nullify import licences allegedly issued or renewed around May 6, 2026, in favour of the NNPC and marketers, including NIPCO, AA Rano, Matrix, Shafa, Pinnacle, and Bono.

The plaintiff further argued that the licences were granted in violation of an earlier court order made on 29 April 2026, which directed all parties to maintain the status quo pending the suit’s resolution.

With both cases before courts of coordinate jurisdiction, the Abuja ruling could complicate the refinery’s legal challenge, particularly as it was not a respondent in the Abuja suit and may therefore be unable to appeal the judgment directly.

The regulator recently approved 830,000 metric tonnes of petrol imports for the fourth quarter of 2026, with Matrix Energy, A.A. Rano and AYM Shafa among six companies issued permits.

Reacting to the Abuja judgment, the National President of PETROAN, Billy Gillis-Harry, described it as a victory for Nigerians, arguing that diversifying supply sources would help address concerns over the availability and cost of petrol.

“The court ruling means a lot. It means victory for the Nigerian people. Once every stakeholder in the industry is focused on ensuring that there is availability of petroleum products, then affordability issues will become something that will be addressed,” he said.

He added, “So it is a victory for the Nigerian people, not just retail outlet owners or marketers. So we congratulate all those who have stood firm to face the tyranny of monopoly and get answers.”

Gillis-Harry also commended the petroleum regulator, saying the judgment reinforced its responsibility to serve consumers and maintain a competitive market. “We salute NMDPRA. It tells us that they are not ready to take sides with anybody. They are there to serve Nigerians, and we look forward to greater days ahead,” he said.

However, the PETROAN president called for the continued issuance of import licences to be extended beyond the three companies involved in the case.

He said, “However, the licensees should not be limited to only the three companies. It should be available to every company that has the capacity to import products and supply Nigerians at an affordable price and available to everyone.”

“In our opinion, supply diversification will guarantee affordability of petroleum products,” he added.

Similarly, the National Publicity Secretary of IPMAN, Chinedu Ukadike, said the judgment should be respected, adding that marketers would continue to purchase products from suppliers offering competitive prices.

“Well, the court is a court of justice, and I know that they have looked at the pros and cons. They also looked at the document submitted before it, and they reviewed the Petroleum Industry Act,” Ukadike said.

He added, “While the refinery can meet up with domestic demand, as I said before, it is a court ruling that must be obeyed.” Ukadike described the judgment as a win-win for marketers, saying their purchasing decisions would depend on the prices offered by domestic refineries and importers.

“If Dangote is producing and it’s cheap, we will look at it and buy from them as marketers. On the other hand, if products from importers are cheaper, we would also buy from them,” he said. “Our business is to ensure that we continue to service and buy products at the cheapest rate and sell to our numerous consumers.”

Speaking with our correspondent, a major marketer, who pleaded for anonymity because of the sensitivity of the matter, expressed concerns over the manner in which operators in the midstream and downstream sectors resorted to courts of coordinate jurisdiction to settle their disputes.

According to the operator, it is sad that the courts are being used as weapons to fight battles in an industry that is supposed to be peaceful. He stated that the marketers appeared to have proved a point that Nigeria belongs to everybody.

“It is sad that we found ourselves in this situation. We now have different courts giving rulings in favour of different groups. It is sad that a court in Lagos ruled that a company in a free zone is not under the regulator. How is that possible?

“It is also sad that a court in Abuja ruled in favour of these marketers without listening to other parties. I think the marketers just wanted to prove that nobody has a monopoly on the courts. But the issue is that Dangote still has a case challenging importation in court. Let’s see how it goes,” the operator said.

However, the Vice President of IPMAN, Hammed Fashola, maintained that the cases were necessary to test the position of the PIA in court.

Fashola advised all operating partners and regulatory bodies within the oil and gas downstream sector to resolve ongoing legal disputes without jeopardising the steady availability and distribution of petroleum products across the country.

Speaking over parallel court cases involving major sector operators regarding petroleum importation regulations under the PIA, IPMAN Vice President, Fashola, emphasised that testing legal frameworks in court remains a legitimate avenue for clarifying ambiguous statutory provisions.