The legal battle between the Wireless Application Service Providers Association of Nigeria (WASPAN) and the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (FCCPC) took a new turn on Monday as contempt proceedings earlier initiated in the matter were withdrawn before the Federal High Court in Lagos.
Justice A. L. Allagoa struck out the contempt application after parties informed the court that issues relating to the committal proceedings had been resolved.
The case, marked FHC/L/CS/760/2026, concerns WASPAN’s challenge to the FCCPC’s Digital, Electronic, Online, and Non-Traditional Consumer Lending Guidelines, 2025, also known as the DEON Regulations. The association is contending that the regulations unlawfully extend the FCCPC’s powers into sectors already regulated by other agencies.
At the court’s Ikoyi division, Kemi Pinheiro, SAN, led the plaintiff’s legal team alongside Chukwudi Enebeli, SAN, Muyiwa Odubela and Pelumi Agbeyo, while Olufunke Aboyade, SAN, appeared for the FCCPC with A. Aribisala, B. Alexander and I. M. Balogun.
At the commencement of proceedings, counsel for the FCCPC informed the court that discussions between both parties had resolved the dispute relating to the contempt proceedings, thereby paving the way for the hearing of substantive applications.
Following the development, Pinheiro formally withdrew the Form 49 contempt process earlier filed by WASPAN, after which the court struck it out.
The court then proceeded to hear arguments on the FCCPC’s preliminary objection challenging the competence of the suit.
Arguing for the FCCPC, Aboyade submitted that the DEON Regulations had been operational since July 2025 and questioned why WASPAN waited until now to challenge them. She maintained that the regulations were designed to protect consumers and argued that the plaintiff failed to comply with statutory pre-action notice requirements before filing the action.
However, Pinheiro opposed the objection, insisting that the FCCPC improperly relied on factual allegations that were not supported by affidavit evidence.
According to him, claims relating to delay and alleged procedural non-compliance cannot be validly raised merely through written submissions. He further argued that constitutional rights granting citizens access to the courts override technical objections tied to pre-action notices, especially where a litigant complains of imminent regulatory harm.
Pinheiro also accused the FCCPC of taking contradictory legal positions by contesting the court’s jurisdiction while simultaneously asking the same court to exercise judicial powers in its favour.
On the substantive issues, WASPAN urged the court to strike down portions of the DEON Regulations, arguing that the FCCPC exceeded its legal mandate.
The association maintained that the commission was attempting to assume regulatory authority already assigned to the Nigerian Communications Commission and the Central Bank of Nigeria under existing laws.
It further argued that subsidiary legislation cannot stand where it conflicts with provisions of Acts enacted by the National Assembly.
The FCCPC, however, defended its powers, insisting that its enabling law gives it authority across sectors where consumer rights are implicated.
Aboyade also submitted that defendants in originating summons proceedings are entitled to formulate independent legal issues in defence of claims brought before the court.
During final submissions, WASPAN challenged documentary exhibits tendered by the FCCPC, arguing that the materials lacked evidential credibility and failed to establish any direct link between the alleged activities of “loan sharks” and members of the association.
After hearing final arguments from both sides, Justice Allagoa adjourned the matter to July 20, 2026, for judgment.
SEE Full Details ➜