Business

Court Restrains FCCPC from Acting Against MultiChoice Over Price Hike

The Federal High Court in Abuja has barred the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (FCCPC) from taking administrative actions against MultiChoice Nigeria Limited following its recent DStv and GOtv price hikes.

Justice James Omotosho issued the interim order on Wednesday in response to an ex parte motion filed by MultiChoice’s lawyer, Moyosore Onibanjo (SAN), in suit number FHC/ABJ/CS/379/2025.

The FCCPC had summoned MultiChoice Nigeria’s Chief Executive Officer for an investigative hearing on February 27, 2025, over concerns about frequent price hikes, potential market dominance abuse, and anti-competitive practices. The commission warned that failure to justify the adjustments could result in regulatory sanctions.

In its court filing, MultiChoice sought an injunction preventing the FCCPC from taking any action that could disrupt its business, arguing that Nigeria operates a free-market economy where businesses are not required to seek approval before adjusting prices. The company also claimed that its subscription rates in Nigeria are the lowest among all the countries where it operates.

MultiChoice had notified customers of the planned price hike set to take effect on March 1, 2025, which included:

  • DStv Compact: ₦19,000 (from ₦15,700) – 25% increase
  • DStv Compact Plus: ₦30,000 (from ₦25,000) – 20% increase
  • DStv Premium: ₦44,500 (from ₦37,000) – 20% increase
  • GOtv Supa Plus: ₦16,800 (from ₦15,700)

Despite ongoing litigation, MultiChoice proceeded with the price adjustments. The FCCPC, in response, threatened legal action, prompting the company to seek judicial protection.

After reviewing the motion, Justice Omotosho restrained the FCCPC from taking any administrative steps against MultiChoice until the case is determined. He also ordered an accelerated hearing, scheduling the next session for March 27, 2025.

Meanwhile, the FCCPC has also taken legal action against MultiChoice at a Lagos High Court, accusing the company of violating regulatory directives and obstructing an ongoing inquiry.

Kindly share this story:
Kindly share this story:
Share on whatsapp
Share on facebook
Share on twitter
Share on linkedin
Share on telegram
Share on facebook
Top News

Related Articles