Connect with us

Telecommunications

Multichoice Nigeria Fined N150 Million, Ordered To Provide Free Month Subscription

The court had earlier prohibited Multichoice from increasing its monthly subscription pending the determination of the suit brought before it

Published

on

MultiChoice Rolls Back Price Increases Following Court Ruling, Customer Backlash

The Competition and Consumer Protection Tribunal has imposed a N150 million fine on Multichoice Nigeria and also mandated it to offer a month of free subscriptions to its DStv and GOtv customers for disobeying its orders.

News About Nigeria reported that the court prohibited Multichoice from increasing its monthly subscription pending the determination of the suit brought before it.

The three-member panel, led by Justice Thomas Okosu, affirmed that the tribunal’s jurisdiction encompasses all business activities within Nigeria.

On April 29, the tribunal issued an order preventing Multichoice Nigeria Limited from implementing a planned price hike for DStv and GOtv subscriptions.

This interim order was in response to an ex-parte motion filed by Ejiro Awaritoma on behalf of the applicant, Festus Onifade.

Onifade, also a legal practitioner, sought two orders in the suit filed on April 29: an interim injunction restraining MultiChoice from proceeding with the impending price increase, and an order preventing the company from taking any steps that may negatively affect the rights of the claimant and other consumers.

Multichoice had announced a new price increase for its subscription packages, set to take effect on May 1, 2024, just four months after the last adjustment.

The company attributed the hike to the rising cost of production in Nigeria, affecting both new and renewing subscribers. 

Multichoice CEO John Ugbe explained that the price adjustments were necessary to continue delivering high-quality content to subscribers across Nigeria.

Despite these reasons, the tribunal’s ruling underscores the need for compliance with consumer protection regulations and the importance of fair business practices.

The court fixed July 3 for a hearing of the substantive suit of the plaintiff.