Admin 
MultiChoice logo
Dec. 13, 2022
The Competition and Consumer Protection Tribunal, (CCPT) has fixed Jan. 26, 2023 for hearing in a suit instituted by Mr Festus Onifade against Multichoice Nigeria Limited and Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission, (FCCPC).
When the matter was called on Tuesday, Onifade told the tribunal that he had an application praying the court to give him fair hearing.
According to him, the hearing of the said application in my absence amounts to a gross breached and violation of my fundamental right to fair hearing.
“I am not aware of the proceedings of Oct. 24 where the application was heard and ruling delivered.
“My right to fair hearing will be breached if the proceedings and the ruling of Oct. 24 is not set aside as the defendants will not be prejudiced by the grant of this application,” he said.
He subsequently prayed the tribunal for an order setting aside the proceedings of Oct. 24 and the ruling delivered on the same date for breached of his right to fair hearing.
He also asked for such further orders as the tribunal may deem fit to make in the circumstances of the case.
The two-man tribunal, presided over by Mr Thomas Okosun, granted the prayer requesting for fair hearing since there was no objection from counsel to Multichoice, Mr Francis Agunbiade and Mr Tam Tamuno who represented the FCCPC.
The tribunal adjourned the matter until Jan. 26 for hearing.
Onifade, a legal practitioner dragged Multichoice to the tribunal challenging the company’s continuous and arbitrary hike in it’s tariffs.
The lawyer alleged that the company kept hiking their prices frequently as it owed the biggest market share in Nigeria in their field and controlled the market with relatively no competition.
The tribunal had asked Multichoice to maintain status quo until the matter was heard and determined but the company ignored the tribunal and continued to hike its tarrif.
Miffed by this, the tribunal fined Multichoice N25 million but the company asked the tribunal to stay execution of the judgment on the grounds that it had appealed against it.(NAN)
