Library / IHS LTD & INT TOWERS LTD VS NMDPRA JUDGEMENT
IHS LTD & INT TOWERS LTD VS NMDPRA JUDGEMENT

Page 15 of 44
the stipulations of the law and consequently, are in breach of the enabling law. 
In response to paragraphs 17 - 24, the actions of the Defendant were in line 
with 
its mandate. The Defendant demanded that the Plaintiffs, as wholesale 
customers, pay. the mandatory statutory levies and as a result, the temporary 
suspension of the activities of the Plaintiffs was because of their non-compliance. 
In 
response 
to 
para. 
24, 
the 
letter purportedly written 
by ALTON 
to the 
Defendant does not change the fact that the Plaintiffs are considered suppliers 
or sellers of petroleum products. In response to para. 27, the Defendant did not 
’ concede that the Plaintiffs were not liable to pay the levies nor were they 
permitted to continue operations illegally. In response to paras. 31 ~ 37, the 
demand notices and reminders were issued in ‘line with the statutory functions 
of the Defendant. In, response to para. 38, the term ‘sold in Nigeria’ has been 
adequately defined 
by the Operations Regulations. The Defendant has the 
authority to enforce levy provisions under the law and has not imposed tax 
-obligations on the Plaintiffs outside statutory provisions. 
T have taken note of the averments in the Plaintiffs’ Further Affidavit in 
response to the Defendant's Counter Affidavit deposed 
to on 
git December, 
2023. I will make reference thereto when appropriate. 
The submission in the Written Address of the Plaintiffs is predicated on the 
questions formulated for determination in the Originating process. 
It 
is submitted on issue 
1, that the Plaintiffs who do not sell petroleum 
products in Nigeria nor hold a wholesale petroleum liquids supply license and are 
not bound by the Petroleum Operations Guidelines and as such, the statutory 
requirement of licensees to publish the price of petroleum products sold in 
Nigeria is also not applicable to the Plaintiffs; reference is made to Ss 174 (1), 
197 (1)-(3) and 208 of the PIA, 2021. The Defendant's demand for the Plaintiffs 
JUDGEMENT IN JAS (NIGERIA) LTD. & ANOR. 
v, THE MIG. MIDSTREAM & DOWNSTREAM PETROL, 
SUIT NO: FHC/ABI/CS/1480/2023 
. 
E