A Federal High Court in Lagos has fixed July 20, 2026, for judgment in a suit filed by the Wireless Application Service Providers Association of Nigeria (WASPAN), challenging consumer lending regulations introduced by the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission, FCCPC.
Justice A.L. Allagoa reserved judgment after lawyers for both parties adopted their final written addresses in the suit marked FHC/L/CS/760/2026 at the court’s Ikoyi division on Monday.
The case centres on the legality of the Digital, Electronic, Online and Non-traditional Consumer Lending Regulations, also known as the DEON Regulations, issued by the FCCPC.
Arguments during proceedings focused heavily on the extent of the FCCPC’s powers within Nigeria’s digital economy and telecommunications sector.
Though the parties were absent in court, WASPAN was represented by Kemi Pinheiro SAN, Chukwudi Enebeli SAN, Muyiwa Odubela and Pelumi Agbeyo, while Olufunke Aboyade SAN appeared for the FCCPC alongside A. Aribisala, B. Alexander and I.M. Balogun.
At the start of proceedings, lawyers informed the court that issues surrounding earlier contempt proceedings had been resolved amicably.
Following the update, Pinheiro withdrew the Form 49 contempt proceedings earlier initiated by the plaintiff, leading the court to strike out the application.
The hearing then shifted to the FCCPC’s preliminary objection challenging the competence of the suit.
Arguing the objection, Aboyade said the DEON Regulations had been in force since July 2025 and questioned why the action was only filed recently.
She maintained that the regulations were introduced to protect consumers and argued that WASPAN failed to comply with mandatory statutory pre-action notice requirements before approaching the court.
Pinheiro, however, urged the court to dismiss the objection, arguing that the FCCPC introduced disputed facts without affidavit evidence to support them.
According to him, issues relating to delay and alleged procedural non-compliance could not be competently raised through written submissions alone.
The senior advocate further argued that constitutional rights granting access to court supersede technical objections tied to pre-action notices where a party alleges imminent regulatory injury.
Pinheiro also accused the FCCPC of taking conflicting legal positions by challenging the court’s jurisdiction while at the same time seeking affirmative relief from the same court.
On the substantive matter, WASPAN asked the court to nullify portions of the DEON Regulations, insisting that the FCCPC exceeded its statutory powers.
The plaintiff argued that although the FCCPC has powers to make regulations under its enabling law, those powers are limited to consumer protection matters and cannot override sector-specific laws governing telecommunications and financial services.
Pinheiro specifically argued that the FCCPC was attempting to exercise powers already vested in the Nigerian Communications Commission, NCC, and the Central Bank of Nigeria, CBN.
He further submitted that subsidiary legislation cannot override Acts of the National Assembly, insisting that the disputed regulations conflict with provisions of the Nigerian Communications Act and the Central Bank of Nigeria Act.
Defending the regulations, the FCCPC insisted its statutory powers extend across sectors where consumer rights and market competition issues arise.
Aboyade also argued that defendants in originating summons proceedings are entitled to formulate and argue independent legal issues in response to claims before the court.
During final exchanges, WASPAN challenged documentary exhibits tendered by the FCCPC, arguing that the materials lacked evidential value and failed to establish any direct link between alleged loan shark activities and members of the association.
After hearing arguments from both sides, Justice Allagoa adjourned the matter until July 20 for judgment.
Comments
Post a Comment