BREAKING: Court Decides Legality Of DStv, GOtv Tariffs Increase May 8
The Federal High Court in Abuja, on Thursday, fixed May 8, 2025, for judgement in a suit filed by MultiChoice Nigeria Limited against the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (FCCPC).
Justice James Omotosho fixed the date after all parties in the shit adopted their processes.
MultiChoice is seeking an order of court stopping the FCCPC from sanctioning it over its recent increase in the DStv and Gotv subscription nationwide.
Moyosore Onigbanjo and J.E.O. Abugu, both Senior Advocates of Nigeria, represented MultiChoice and the FCCPC respectively, in the matter.
Justice Omotosho had on March 12, restrained FCCPC from sanctioning the pay-TV company until the hearing and determination of the substance suit following an ex-parte motion filed by Onigbanjo.
The FCCPC had summoned MultiChoice Nigeria Ltd to provide explanations regarding the 1 March price review of its packages.
The commission directed the company’s chief executive officer to appear for an investigative hearing on February 27 raising concerns over frequent price hikes, potential market dominance abuse and anti-competitive practices within the pay-TV industry.
The FCCPC also warned that failure to justify the price adjustment or comply with fair market principles would lead to regulatory sanctions.
However, in the ex parte motion marked FHC/ABJ/CS/379/2025 the company sought an order of interim injunction restraining the FCCPC and its officers from carrying out the threat against it, pending the hearing and determination of the motion for an interlocutory injunction.
It also sought an order restraining the commission and its officers from issuing any further directive or taking any steps capable of disrupting its business activities, pending the hearing and determination of the motion for an interlocutory injunction.
“An order of interim injunction restraining the FCCPC, its agents, servants, or privies from sanctioning or penalising MultiChoice (the applicant) in any manner whatsoever in relation to its price increase pending the hearing and determination of the motion for an interlocutory injunction,” another prayer read.
