The Federal High Court, Lagos, has struck out contempt proceedings initiated by Wireless Application Service Providers Association of Nigeria (WISPAN) against Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (FCCPC).
This was after parties informed the court that issues surrounding the committal proceedings had been resolved.
Justice Ambrose Lewis-Allagoa subsequently struck out the contempt application after counsel informed the court that issues surrounding the committal proceedings had been amicably resolved.
The suit, marked FHC/L/CS/760/2026, centred on WASPAN’s challenge to FCCPC’s Digital, Electronic, Online and Non-Traditional Consumer Lending Guidelines, 2025 (DEON Regulations), which the association alleged unlawfully extended the commission’s regulatory powers into sectors already supervised by other agencies.
At the proceedings on Tuesday, Kemi Pinheiro, SAN, led the plaintiff’s team alongside Chukwudi Enebeli, SAN, while Olufunke Aboyade, SAN, represented FCCPC.
At the commencement of proceedings, counsel to FCCPC informed the court that discussions between the parties had resolved issues relating to the contempt proceedings, thereby paving the way for the hearing of substantive applications in the suit.
Following the development, Pinheiro formally withdrew the Form 49 contempt proceedings earlier filed by WASPAN, prompting the court to strike out the application.
The matter then proceeded to the hearing of FCCPC’s preliminary objection challenging the competence of the suit.
Aboyade argued that DEON Regulations had been in operation since July 2025 and questioned why the plaintiff waited until now to challenge them.
She maintained that the regulations were introduced to protect consumers and further contended that WASPAN failed to comply with statutory pre-action notice requirements before instituting the suit.
Pinheiro, however, opposed the objection, arguing that FCCPC relied on factual allegations unsupported by affidavit evidence.
According to him, issues relating to delay and procedural non-compliance cannot validly be raised through mere written submissions without evidential backing.
He further argued that constitutional provisions guaranteeing citizens access to the courts overrode technical objections relating to pre-action notices, particularly where a litigant alleged imminent regulatory harm.
Pinheiro also accused FCCPC of adopting inconsistent legal positions by challenging the court’s jurisdiction while simultaneously seeking judicial reliefs from the same court.
On the substantive issues, WASPAN urged the court to nullify portions of DEON Regulations, contending that FCCPC exceeded its statutory mandate.
The association stated that the commission was attempting to exercise regulatory powers already vested in Nigerian Communications Commission (NCC) and Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) under existing laws.
WASPAN maintained that subsidiary legislation could not stand where it conflicted with Acts of the National Assembly.
In response, FCCPC defended its powers, insisting that its enabling law grants the commission authority across sectors where consumer protection issues arise.
Aboyade also argued that defendants in originating summons proceedings were entitled to formulate independent legal issues in defence of claims brought before the court.
During final submissions, the plaintiff challenged documentary exhibits tendered by FCCPC, stating that the materials lack evidential credibility and fail to establish any direct nexus between alleged activities of “loan sharks” and members of WASPAN.
After hearing arguments from both sides, Allagoa adjourned the matter until July 20, 2026, for judgement.
