ABUJA — A Federal High Court judgment in Abuja directing the Nigerian Midstream and Downstream Petroleum Regulatory Authority (NMDPRA) to continue granting and renewing petroleum products import licences has intensified a wider legal and commercial dispute over the future of fuel supply in Nigeria as domestic refining capacity expands.
The ruling, delivered by Justice Inyang Ekwo, has placed the rights of petroleum importers under the Petroleum Industry Act (PIA) at the centre of an increasingly consequential contest between domestic refiners and fuel marketers.
According to The Punch report, the Abuja case, brought by Matrix Energy, A.A. Rano Nigeria Limited and AYM Shafa Limited, is unfolding alongside a separate suit by Dangote Petroleum Refinery at the Federal High Court in Lagos challenging the continued issuance and renewal of petrol import licences to the Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited (NNPC) and several marketers.
The parallel cases could have significant implications for Nigeria’s downstream petroleum market, particularly over how competition, domestic refining, import dependence and regulatory discretion are balanced under the PIA.
Court backs import licences
Justice Ekwo ruled that the NMDPRA’s refusal to regularly issue or renew the import licences of the three marketers was inconsistent with provisions of the PIA.
The court held that the regulator was required to promote competition in the midstream and downstream petroleum sectors and declared that the companies were entitled to the issuance, extension, renewal or reissuance of the relevant licences, subject to compliance with all statutory and regulatory requirements.
The court specifically ordered the NMDPRA to continue to grant, issue, extend, renew or reissue licences, permits and authorisations for midstream and downstream petroleum operations, particularly those relating to petroleum product imports.
Justice Ekwo also relied on relevant provisions of the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Act, which require the promotion of competitive markets and prohibit abuse of dominant market positions and restrictive business practices.
The three companies had argued that the PIA did not prohibit petroleum product imports and that the regulator could not arbitrarily restrict eligible companies from participating in the import market.
They also told the court that they had collectively invested more than $20bn in infrastructure, logistics and retail networks.
In an affidavit, A.A. Rano Executive Director Sabiu Saidu Mahuta alleged that the companies had received import licences only sporadically since July 2025, despite repeated applications.
The marketers argued that restrictions on imports could encourage market dominance and reduce competition in the downstream sector.
Import volumes keep market debate alive
The legal dispute comes against the backdrop of continued petrol imports despite the emergence of large-scale domestic refining capacity.
Available industry figures indicate that petroleum marketers imported an average of about 95.7 million litres of petrol daily between January and August 2026, amounting to roughly 23.2 billion litres during the period.
The scale of imports has intensified questions about the role that imported products should continue to play as Nigeria moves towards greater domestic refining.
The NMDPRA has also approved 830,000 metric tonnes of petrol imports for the fourth quarter of 2026, with Matrix Energy, A.A. Rano and AYM Shafa among the companies granted permits.
For marketers, however, the continued availability of multiple supply sources remains important to competition and product availability.
Dangote refinery case adds legal complexity
The Abuja judgment comes only days before a major hearing in Lagos involving Dangote Petroleum Refinery.
The Federal High Court in Lagos has fixed October 7 for hearing in the refinery’s suit, marked FHC/L/CS/857/2026, challenging fuel import licences allegedly issued or renewed around May 6, 2026, for NNPC and a number of petroleum marketers.
The defendants named in the case include NIPCO, A.A. Rano, Matrix Energy, AYM Shafa, Pinnacle and Bono.
Dangote Refinery has argued that the issuance or renewal of the licences breached an earlier order of April 29 directing parties to maintain the status quo pending determination of the case.
The Lagos proceedings therefore introduce a second judicial track into the dispute over petroleum imports.
The Abuja case and the Lagos case are before courts of coordinate jurisdiction, creating the possibility of differing judicial interpretations of the regulatory framework governing fuel imports.
Dangote Refinery was not a party to the Abuja proceedings, meaning the judgment does not itself determine the issues raised in the Lagos case.
Marketers defend open supply channels
Petroleum marketers have welcomed the Abuja judgment, arguing that access to multiple sources of supply will strengthen competition and provide consumers with more purchasing options.
The National President of the Petroleum Products Retail Outlets Owners Association of Nigeria (PETROAN), Billy Gillis-Harry, described the judgment as beneficial to consumers because of its potential to broaden supply sources.
He argued that greater supply diversification could improve both availability and affordability.
Gillis-Harry also maintained that import licences should not be restricted to the three companies involved in the case.
According to him, any company with the capacity to import petroleum products and meet regulatory requirements should be able to participate in the market.
The Independent Petroleum Marketers Association of Nigeria (IPMAN) also said marketers would continue to consider price when deciding whether to purchase from domestic refineries or importers.
IPMAN National Publicity Secretary Chinedu Ukadike said the court decision should be respected, noting that marketers would buy from whichever supplier offered competitive prices.
“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.
The position underscores the commercial reality facing marketers: regardless of the source, product pricing remains a major determinant of purchasing decisions.
Industry divided over competing court cases
The emergence of parallel legal proceedings has nevertheless raised concerns within the industry.
A major petroleum marketer, who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the dispute, questioned the growing reliance on courts of coordinate jurisdiction to resolve commercial and regulatory disagreements in the downstream sector.
The operator said differing judicial decisions could create uncertainty for investors, regulators and market participants.
IPMAN Vice President Hammed Fashola, however, said litigation remained a legitimate mechanism for clarifying provisions of the PIA.
He urged all parties to allow the courts to interpret the law while ensuring that legal disputes did not disrupt petroleum supplies.
According to Fashola, any conflicting decisions from lower courts could ultimately be addressed through the appellate system.
He also called on Dangote Refinery, importers, regulators and other stakeholders to preserve product availability while the legal issues are being resolved.
PIA faces test as refining landscape changes
Energy sector expert Dan Kunle argued that the dispute exposes a broader policy problem: the PIA was enacted before Nigeria had a large-scale private refinery capable of materially changing the country’s fuel supply structure.
According to Kunle, the law needs to be reviewed to reflect the emergence of large domestic refining projects and the changing economics of the downstream petroleum market.
He said that while the Abuja court may have interpreted the existing law according to its wording, the economic circumstances surrounding the petroleum industry have changed significantly since the PIA was enacted.
The key issue, he argued, is whether unrestricted or broadly available import licences should remain a permanent feature of the market when substantial domestic refining capacity is available.
Kunle called for an amendment to the PIA that would give the government greater discretion to authorise imports when they are required to address supply shortages or other strategic needs.
Under such a framework, he argued, imports could remain available as a contingency mechanism without necessarily becoming the dominant or automatic source of petroleum products.
The bigger market question
The dispute is increasingly moving beyond the immediate question of whether Matrix, A.A. Rano and AYM Shafa should receive import licences.
At stake is the structure of Nigeria’s downstream petroleum market after the emergence of major private refining capacity.
The competing arguments reflect two different interpretations of competition.
For importers and marketers, competition means maintaining access to multiple sources of petroleum products so that no single supplier can dominate the market.
For proponents of stronger domestic refining protection, competition must also account for the economic cost of continuing to import products that can increasingly be produced locally.
The courts are now being asked to interpret the existing legal framework against that rapidly changing market reality.
For the NMDPRA, the immediate challenge is to comply with judicial decisions while maintaining a regulatory system that accommodates both domestic refiners and importers.
For marketers, the issue is access to competitively priced products.
For domestic refiners, the concern is whether sustained imports could weaken the commercial case for billions of dollars invested in refining infrastructure.
And for consumers, the central question remains whether competition between domestic and imported fuel ultimately translates into reliable supply and competitive prices.
With the Abuja judgment now on record and the Dangote Refinery case scheduled for further hearing in Lagos on October 7, the courts are set to play a major role in determining how Nigeria’s post-refinery downstre