…AYM Shafa, A. A. Rano Limited and Matrix Petroleum in their response averred that the plan to monopolise the oil sector is a recipe for disaster 

The Dangote Petroleum Refinery and Petrochemicals FZE has sought to amend its suit against the Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited (NNPCL) and others.

The plea to amend the suit followed an application by the NNPCL before Justice Inyang Ekwo of a Federal High Court in Abuja, urging the court to strike out the case for being incompetent.

The Dangote Refinery had sued Nigeria Midstream and Downstream Petroleum Regulatory Authority (NMDPRA) and Nigeria National Petroleum Corporation Limited (NNPCL) as 1st and 2nd defendants; and also listed as 3rd to 7th defendants respectively in the originating summons, marked:  FHC/ABJ/CS/1324/2024 and dated Sept. 6, were AYM Shafa Limited, A. A. Rano Limited, T. Time Petroleum Limited, 2015 Petroleum Limited, and Matrix Petroleum Services Limited.

The oil company, through its lawyer, Ogwu Onoja, SAN, prayed the court to nullify import licences issued by NMDPRA to the NNPCL and the five other companies to import refined petroleum products.

The company (plaintiff) also prayed the court to declare that NMDPRA violated Sections 317(8) and (9) of the Petroleum Industry Act (PIA) by issuing licenses for the importation of petroleum products.

It stated that such licenses should only be issued in circumstances where there is a petroleum product shortfall.

It equally sought N100 billion in damages against NMDPRA for allegedly continuing to issue import licences to NNPCL and the five companies for importing petroleum products.

But the NNPCL (2nd defendant), in its preliminary objection dated and filed Nov. 15, urged the court to strike out the suit.

It argued that the Nigeria National Petroleum Corporation Limited (NNPC) sued by the refinery was a non-existent entity.

The company, through its lawyer, Kehinde Ogunwumiju, SAN, said the Nigerian National Petroleum Company Limited (NNPCL), being its registered name with the Corporate Affairs Commission, is not the same as the 2nd defendant sued by the plaintiff.

It further argued that the court lacked jurisdiction over the 2nd defendant sued Nigeria National Petroleum Corporation Limited (NNPC).

“A simple search on the CAC website shows that there is no entity called ‘Nigeria National Petroleum Corporation Limited (NNPC),’” the 2nd defendant said.

The NNPCL, therefore, said that the 2nd defendant, as sued by the refinery in the instant suit, is not a competent party or a juristic person, urging the court to strike out its name or the suit in its entirety.

Meanwhile, the Dangote Refinery, in a motion on notice dated Nov. 25 but filed Nov. 28 by Onoja, sought an order, granting leave to the company to amend its originating summons in accordance with the rules of the court.

The refinery, in a copy of the motion sighted on Monday, said this would allow it to correct the name of the 2nd defendant to read; “Nigerian National Petroleum  Company Limited,” instead of “Nigeria National Petroleum Corporation Limited (NNPC)” earlier listed.

In the affidavit in support of the motion deposed to by Vincent Sani, a litigation clerk in the law firm of Onoja, he said he was informed by one of their lawyers, Innocent Adoo, on Nov. 25 that after the filing of the originating processes in the suit, he observed that the 2nd defendant’s name was erroneously spelt, hence, the need for the amendment.

Sani averred that the said amendment had become necessary in order for the record of the court to bear the proper description of the 2nd defendant (NNPCL) as a party in the suit.

The litigation clerk said that the NNPCL was yet to be served with the said originating processes sought to be amended.

According to him, the proposed amended originating summons, affidavit in support and written address, are hereby exhibited and marked as “Exhibit A.”

Sani, who averred that the defendants/respondents would not be prejudiced if the application was granted, said that justice would be better served if their plea is considered.

However, observes that the proposed originating summons, filed on Nov. 28 and dated Sept. 6, seeks the same relief as the earlier filed by the refinery.

It would be recalled that three oil marketers had also prayed the court to dismiss suit.

The oil marketers, in a joint counter affidavit marked: FHC/ABJ/CS/1324/2024 filed on Nov. 5 in response to Dangote Refinery’s originating summons, told Justice Ekwo that granting that application would spell doom for the country’s oil sector.

According to them, the plan to monopolise the oil sector is a recipe for disaster in the country.

The three marketers; AYM Shafa Limited, A. A. Rano Limited and Matrix Petroleum Services Limited, in their response, said the plaintiff did not produce adequate petroleum products for the daily consumption of Nigerians.

Besides, they argued that there was nothing placed before the court to prove the contrary.

Justice Ekwo had fixed Jan. 20, 2025, for report of settlement or service.

…Handles 250 tankers amidst inadequate Tugboats

Wine glasses are clinking and encomiums pouring in Lekki today, as the Dangote Petroleum Refinery Oil Terminal [Offshore SPMs], proudly celebrates one year of nonstop operations, since welcoming its first Tanker berthing, MT ST NNENE.

The giant vessel, a Gas Oil/diesel laden Ship, according to the Maritime First, enjoys the historical status of being a first tanker caller, at Dangote terminal.

Between then and today, Saturday, December 7th, 2024, the terminal has handled not fewer than 250 tanker- ships.

Though it was difficult getting to speak with Dangote Group image maker, Chiejina, a source who craved anonymity told the Maritime First that management was sincerely thankful to God, for all that the terminal had achieved, within one year.

“We extend our heartfelt gratitude to everyone who has contributed to this remarkable journey and made it so rewarding”, the source stated further, adding:

“As we look ahead, we anticipate even busier times and aim to achieve even greater milestones”, while thanking both Team Dangote and all its supporters for being a part and parcel of the success story!

“Operations are popping up every day”, he said, stressing that the terminal’s activities had been so impactful that it was already helping to strengthen the Naira, against the Dollar; with a soaring probability of truly assisting to lure more Dollars into the country.

“This is a big achievement. It is helping the Nigerian Ports Authority NPA to prove it is capable of doing all of which the International Oil Companies IOCs had thought it was incapable of”,

“Dangote is not only taking over the Nigerian market, it will soon take over the West African route too”, he further told the Maritime First.

Zeroing on the operational aspect, the source praised the NPA, for the great way it has handled the growing vessel traffic around the Lekki Deep-sea Port.

He however stressed the fact of infrastructure inadequacy, citing tugboats as one good example.

“We are eyeing a minimum of 17 tankers of varying sizes, monthly. Even this morning, three tankers sailed in between 3.00 am and 4.00 am. Two came with crude and the third had products. Do you know what toll such takes on tugboats?

“So, there’s no gainsaying the fact that NPA needs more tugboats over there than it does, presently!”, he stated further, noting that the authority has currently deployed just a few of its several tugboats around there.

Every effort to obtain an official reaction from the Nigerian Ports Authority NPA proved abortive as the authority’s image maker, Ikechukwu Onyemakara woefully failed to pick up his calls.

,

The airline’s Chief Operating Officer (COO),  Mrs Oluwatoyin Olajide, disclosed this at a news conference on Friday in Lagos.

Olajide said that N7 million is required to purchase 4,000 litres of jet A1 (aviation fuel), which is currently sold for N1,400 per litre.

She added that for Aircraft, Crew, Maintenance and Insurance (ACMI), the airline spends about 4,000 dollars for a one-hour flight.

According to the COO, N5 million is required for every one-hour flight, a figure significantly higher than what operators’ counterparts pay globally.

“There are factors that define operating cost and they include aviation fuel which takes between 60 per cent to 65 per cent of the operating cost.

“One litre of fuel is N1,400. If I have to operate a one-hour flight from here to Abuja, Port Harcourt, Owerri, I am going to be using about 4,000 litres of fuel.

“So, on average, a one-hour flight costs N7 million on fuel alone. Also, ACMI costs 4,000 dollars for leasing planes, considering the challenges we are currently facing,” Olajide said.

She explained that, on average, operating a one-hour flight costs N7 million, with an additional N7 million for fuel, bringing the total to N14 million.

She noted that insurance for a one-hour flight costs an additional N5 million.

“For financing, we pay about 30 per cent to borrow money, while foreign airlines pay around three per cent. Also, Nigerian airlines pay four times more than others for spare parts,” she added.

According to Olajide, given the operating costs of Nigerian airlines, it is not easy to operate with the current airfares.

She emphasised that a one-hour trip within Nigeria should cost no less than N500,000.

Speaking on the recent report of fare exploitation, Olajide said that the allegation had cost the airline a major international slot.

She also clarified that the Federal Consumer and Customer Protection Commission (FCCPC) only invited the airline for enquiry and not an investigation as reported by some media.

She said that the Chairman of the Airline, Dr Allen Onyema, honoured the invitation.

She, however, said that FCCPC could have directed the enquiry to the Nigeria Civil Aviation Authority (NCAA), the regulator of the airline.

Olajide recalled the airline’s selflessness during COVID-19, Xenophobia and the evacuation of stranded Nigerians from foreign countries at no cost.

It was also recalled that the FCCPC had on Dec. 2 written to the airline, inviting them for an enquiry on the complaint of fare exploitation.

The FCCPC later clarified that it was not investigating the airline but rather an enquiry, contrary to reports circulated in the media