Dangote, NMDPRA clash over propane operations as court extends restraining order
Dangote, NMDPRA clash over propane operations as court extends restraining order
The dispute between the Dangote Petroleum Refinery and the Nigerian Midstream and Downstream Petroleum Regulatory Authority (NMDPRA) over the handling and distribution of propane intensified on Wednesday as both parties returned to the Federal High Court in Lagos.
The regulator asked the court to discharge an interim order restraining it from enforcing its directive suspending propane loading and truck-out operations at the refinery, while Dangote accused the authority of exceeding its regulatory powers.
Justice Akintayo Aluko had, on August 31, restrained NMDPRA, its officers, agents and representatives from entering, sealing, shutting down, restricting access to, obstructing, suspending, disrupting, inspecting, supervising or sanctioning the refinery’s operations pending the hearing and determination of the substantive application.
At Wednesday’s proceedings, NMDPRA, represented by its counsel, Matthew Burkaa, argued that the interim order was obtained through alleged misrepresentation and suppression of material facts.
The regulator also questioned the jurisdiction of Justice Aluko to grant the order, contending that Dangote Refinery had failed to file the required motion on notice when its ex-parte application was heard.
NMDPRA said its decision to suspend propane loading and truck-out operations followed an investigation into the alleged diversion of propane-laden trucks to unknown and unlicensed customers, as well as the alleged illegal blending of propane at some LPG plants.
According to the authority, laboratory tests conducted on LPG samples obtained from three plants — Selai, Tewa and Ameego Pago — showed propane content above 50 per cent.
It said the industry standard requires propane to constitute no more than 20 per cent of an LPG blend, with butane accounting for about 80 per cent.
The regulator said representatives of the three plants were invited to explain the findings and identified Sublime Oil and Gas Limited, an off-taker from Dangote Refinery, as their source of propane.
This, it said, prompted a broader reconciliation and material-balance exercise involving propane-producing facilities and LPG-blending plants.
NMDPRA further alleged that its officials were denied access to inspect propane-loading operations and records at the Dangote refinery on August 24.
It subsequently issued a notice of potential non-compliance and directed the refinery to suspend propane loading and truck-out operations pending the conclusion of its investigation and the introduction of additional safety measures.
The authority said its examination of truck-out manifests from the refinery also revealed what it described as significant discrepancies.
It alleged that Sublime Oil and Gas lifted 25 trucks of propane on August 20 and 22 for delivery to Navgas/Agasco, but Navgas confirmed receiving only six of the consignments.
The remaining 19 trucks, it said, could not be accounted for.
NMDPRA also alleged that records from Delta State indicated that another off-taker loaded 52 trucks between May and August 2026 for delivery to Navgas, but Navgas reportedly confirmed that none of the consignments was received.
The regulator maintained that the alleged diversion of propane to unauthorised and unlicensed customers posed serious public health and safety risks, particularly where the product was subsequently used for LPG blending outside approved standards.
It further claimed that propane produced by Dangote and other gas-processing facilities had a vapour pressure of about 13 bar, compared with the maximum seven-bar pressure required for the standard propane-butane LPG mixture.
According to the authority, the higher-pressure propane could create an explosion risk at LPG refilling plants not designed to handle such pressure.
Dangote, however, rejected the allegations, insisting that NMDPRA officials had inspected and certified the propane before it left the refinery.
The group’s spokesman, Anthony Chiejina, said the regulator could not blame the refinery for what happened to the product after it had been certified and purchased by independent off-takers.
“We have NMDPRA staff there in the refinery. They inspected and certified the product as okay. Then, a company came to pick up the product with its truck, not Dangote’s truck. You later arrested the truck somewhere else and said it was conveying adulterated or blended propane. How does that concern us after you tested and certified our product okay?” he said.
Chiejina accused the regulator of abusing its powers, saying, “You went to the plant to seal it and later left the plant. For me, that is an absolute abuse of power by NMDPRA. And that is just a diabolical sense of control. It makes no sense. That’s what led to the court action.”
He also challenged NMDPRA to produce its records in support of the allegations.
“They have a hidden transcript. Assuming you entered our refinery and discovered that what we have there is blended, that’s a different thing. You have earlier certified the product,” he said.
On the alleged movement of the propane trucks, Chiejina said Dangote Refinery could not be held responsible for the actions of independent buyers after they had taken possession of the product.
“Let them go and check their records. And the owner of the truck has left with his truck. Where he goes with his truck – is it my business? He does what he likes with his products,” he said.
During Wednesday’s proceedings, counsel to Dangote Refinery, Wale Akoni, SAN, drew the court’s attention to NMDPRA’s counter-affidavit filed in opposition to the refinery’s motion on notice.
Akoni requested an adjournment to enable him to respond, explaining that he had only received the counter-affidavit in court on Wednesday.
Burkaa did not object to the request but stressed the urgency of the case because of the safety concerns raised by the regulator.
Justice Aluko, however, said he could not fix a fresh hearing date because he was sitting as a vacation judge and the court’s annual vacation would end on Friday.
“My jurisdiction ends on Friday as far as the vacation matter is concerned. Therefore, the Admin Judge will, in his wisdom, decide where the case file should go,” the judge said.
He directed that the case file be returned to the registry for assignment to the regular court by the administrative judge.
The judge nevertheless extended the interim order restraining NMDPRA from interfering with the refinery’s operations pending the hearing and determination of the substantive application.
“I find it proper to extend the interim order made on the 31st day of August 2026. It shall continue to subsist and shall be in force till the hearing and determination of the motion on notice, or until the court gives further directive,” Justice Aluko held.
He subsequently ordered that the case file be remitted to the registry for assignment to the regular court.
The interim order therefore remains in force while the substantive dispute over NMDPRA’s regulatory intervention, the quality and handling of propane, and the alleged diversion of trucks awaits determination by the court.
