The Competitors and Client Safety Tribunal has dismissed the settlement phrases and consent order involving Coca-Cola Nigeria Restricted (CCNL) and the Federal Competitors and Client Safety Fee (FCCPC).
This follows the Fee’s withdrawal of its N186 million mislabeling penalty initially imposed on CCNL over misleading commerce descriptions.
The ruling and judgement have been delivered by the tribunal’s three-member panel, led by Thomas Okosu, on April 30, 2025.
CCNL had appealed the N186 million penalty imposed by the FCCPC over its labeling and advertising practices, amongst different points, in Nigeria.
Nairametrics beforehand reported that the FCCPC formally accused Coca-Cola Nigeria Ltd and its sister firm of utilizing deceptive commerce descriptions and unfair advertising ways for his or her merchandise “Authentic Style” and “Much less Sugar.”
The Fee said that it discovered NBC making use of allegedly misleading commerce descriptions to the 2 variants and distributing them to shoppers, violating Part 116(3) of the FCCPA.
In its supplementary order, the FCCPC later directed CCNL to pay a penalty of N186,666,666.67 on or earlier than September 6, 2024, for the alleged contravention of related legal guidelines.
Authorized Dispute
In its enchantment, CCNL’s authorized group, led by Professor Gbolahan Elias (SAN), requested the tribunal to put aside the FCCPC’s orders and restrain the Fee from implementing any provisions of its Remaining and Supplementary Orders towards the appellant.
- He cited issues over truthful listening to, lack of jurisdiction, and the truth that the corporate’s merchandise have been permitted by the Nationwide Company for Meals and Drug Administration and Management (NAFDAC).
- Nevertheless, FCCPC counsel Abimbola Ojenike raised 13 grounds opposing the model’s request to nullify the penalty and accusations.
He argued that Coca-Cola’s claims of procedural unfairness and bias have been unfounded, emphasizing that the corporate had ample alternatives for a good listening to, together with taking part in investigations, submitting written statements, and attending a number of consultative conferences.
Tribunal’s Judgment
On the resumed judgment on Wednesday, CCNL’s counsel, G. Abubakar, knowledgeable the tribunal that after the listening to on March 18, 2025, the appellant and respondent (FCCPC) continued settlement discussions.
- He apologized for bringing the tribunal’s consideration to the matter at this stage.
“I need to sincerely apologize to the tribunal for the difficulty of writing the judgment,” he stated.
- He famous that the FCCPC had issued a consent order dated April 24, 2025, pursuant to Part 149 of the FCCPA Act 2018.
“Each the appellant and the respondent (FCCPC) additionally filed phrases of settlement dated April 24, 2025,” he added, stating that the notices have been filed with the tribunal on April 29, 2025.
Whereas adopting the notices, he argued that the event aligns with the provisions of the FCCPA and different related legal guidelines.
FCCPC’s lawyer, Ojenike, confirmed receiving the paperwork — the phrases of settlement and the discover of the consent order dated April 29, 2025 — from CCNL’s authorized group.
“We now have additionally confirmed the execution of the consent order in a communication from the FCCPC’s Director of Authorized Providers, A.W. Achimugu,” he added.
He famous that the communication mirrored the FCCPC’s intent concerning the event.
In his ruling, Okosu noticed that the phrases of settlement between FCCPC and CCNL weren’t according to a correct and legally acceptable utility.
“The discover of settlement accommodates arguments irrelevant to the moment case,” he stated, noting they referenced an related matter.
- He acknowledged that whereas regulators are inspired to settle instances, such settlements should serve the general public curiosity and never restrict regulatory obligations.
- He stated the settlement seemed to be an try and “arrest” the tribunal’s judgment, significantly following its latest ruling towards the Nigerian Bottling Firm Restricted (NBC), which holds the Coca-Cola bottling franchise.
“These phrases of settlement aren’t supported by regulation nor are they within the public curiosity,” the tribunal stated, describing the event as “troubling.”
- The choose famous {that a} penalty had been imposed on Coca-Cola for wrongdoing, but the corporate secured a settlement with the FCCPC on a “no-fault foundation.”
- He additionally questioned why the FCCPC eliminated the N186 million penalty and changed it with a N198 million reimbursement to the Fee with out providing an evidence.
“The stubbornness within the filings by the events is grave,” the choose said, as he dismissed the phrases of settlement submitted by the FCCPC and CCNL.
In its judgment, the tribunal held that the FCCPC had constitutionally imposed its findings and the N186 million order on CCNL.
- Okosu additionally decided that CCNL was granted a good listening to throughout the FCCPC’s five-year investigation, which included a number of conferences with the corporate, contradicting the appellant’s claims.
- He agreed with the FCCPC’s place that Coca-Cola misled Nigerian shoppers by way of misleading commerce descriptions, even when the merchandise have been NAFDAC-approved.
- The tribunal subsequently dismissed CCNL’s enchantment for missing benefit and ordered the corporate to pay the N186 million penalty inside 60 days.
What You Ought to Know
Nairametrics earlier reported that the FCCPC had dedicated to the Competitors and Client Safety Tribunal that it will not take any “regulatory or enforcement motion” towards Coca-Cola Nigeria Ltd pending the end result of the corporate’s enchantment.
On April 28, 2025, the CCPT had additionally ordered NBC to pay the FCCPC N190 million as a mislabeling penalty.
Be First to Comment