The Federal High Court in Abuja has fixed May 8, 2025, for judgment in the legal battle between MultiChoice Nigeria Limited and the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (FCCPC) over the recent price increases for DStv and GOtv subscriptions.
Justice James Omotosho set the date after hearing arguments from both parties, following an earlier court order that restrained the FCCPC from taking any regulatory actions against MultiChoice pending the case’s resolution.
The dispute began after MultiChoice announced new subscription rates for its pay-TV services, with increases of up to 25% across various packages. The DStv Compact bouquet, for instance, rose from ₦15,700 to ₦19,000, while DStv Premium moved from ₦37,000 to ₦44,500. GOtv Supa Plus also saw a price hike from ₦15,700 to ₦16,800. These adjustments, which took effect on March 1, 2025, followed a similar increase less than a year earlier.
Concerned about the frequent price hikes and their impact on Nigerian consumers, the FCCPC summoned MultiChoice for an investigative hearing on February 27. The Commission sought an explanation for the adjustments and warned that failure to justify them could lead to regulatory sanctions. MultiChoice, however, requested to reschedule the meeting to March 6. The FCCPC agreed but instructed the company to suspend the price changes pending further discussions.
Rather than comply, MultiChoice filed an ex parte motion at the Federal High Court, seeking an interim injunction to prevent the FCCPC from taking any action against it. The company’s lead counsel, Moyosore J. Onibanjo (SAN), argued that Nigeria operates a free-market economy where service providers are not required to obtain regulatory approval before adjusting prices. He maintained that the FCCPC lacks the authority to dictate price changes, as such powers reside solely with the President.
In response, the FCCPC, represented by Prof. Joe Agbugu (SAN), countered that MultiChoice had acknowledged the Commission’s supervisory role when it formally notified regulators about the impending price adjustments on February 25. He emphasized that the FCCPC’s mandate includes preventing market dominance abuse and ensuring fair competition. The Commission, he argued, has the authority to set an “authorized price” if a company’s pricing strategy unfairly exploits consumers.
As the case progressed, MultiChoice insisted that the FCCPC’s intervention was misplaced, as its regulatory powers do not extend to price control. Onibanjo described the Commission’s concerns as an “afterthought,” stressing that there was no legal basis for blocking the price increases.
After hearing from both sides, Justice Omotosho reserved judgment until May 8. The ruling is expected to clarify the extent of the FCCPC’s regulatory powers over pricing in Nigeria’s pay-TV sector.
The case has drawn significant public interest, as many Nigerians have expressed frustration over rising subscription fees amid economic hardship. While MultiChoice argues that inflation and increased operational costs justify the price hikes, consumer advocates insist that regulatory oversight is necessary to protect subscribers from unfair pricing. The court’s decision will likely have far-reaching implications for pricing policies in the pay-TV industry and beyond.
