TheNewsGuru

Tag: gotv

  • MultiChoice faces fresh N10m suit for hiking DStv, GOtv subscriptions

    MultiChoice faces fresh N10m suit for hiking DStv, GOtv subscriptions

    A Competition and Consumer Protection (CCPC) Tribunal sitting in Abuja, on Monday, okayed a N10 million fresh suit filed by a lawyer, Festus Onifade, against MultiChoice Nigeria Limited, the operators of DStv and Gotv.

    Onifade, in the amended originating summons, also sought the order of the tribunal directing and mandating MultiChoice to adopt to a pay-as-you-view model of billing for all its products and services forthwith.

    The three-member tribunal led by Thomas Okosun granted the lawyer’s reliefs in an application seeking for a leave to amend his earlier originating summons.

    The tribunal, which dismissed the objection of counsel for the company, Jamiu Agoro, ordered the defendants in the matter to file their responses to the new application within 21 days.

    The claimants; Onifade, a legal practitioner, and Coalition of Nigeria Consumers, on behalf of himself and others, had sued the company and Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (FCCPC) as 1st and 2nd respondents respectively.

    They had prayed the tribunal for an order, restraining the firm from increasing its services and other products on April 1, pending the hearing and determination of the motion on notice dated and filed on March 30, and the tribunal granted the ex-parte motion, directing parties to maintain status quo ante bellum.

    But the company, inspite of the tribunal’s order, was alleged to have gone ahead with the price increase on DStv and Gotv subscriptions.

    And on April 11, the tribunal ordered MultiChoice to revert back to the old prices by maintaining status quo of its March 30 order pending the hearing and determination of the substantive matter.

    At the resumed hearing, Onifade informed that on June 15 when the panel sat, the matter was adjourned for application on amendment.

    He, however, said that due to minor irregularities in the earlier motion filed on June 7, he decided to file another applicated dated June 17 but filed June 20 (today) to substitute the first one.

    “We are withdrawing the earlier application dated June 7 and substituting it with that of June 17,” he said.

    He further said that though the 2nd defendant had been served, the 1st defendant (MultiChoice) lawyer refused to collect the application from him.

    Okosun then directed Agoro to collect the process so that the tribunal could give the matter accelerated hearing.

    After being served in the open court, Agoro asked for a cost having joined issues with Onifade in the earlier application he sought to substitute and the tribunal awarded a N20, 000 cost against the claimants.

    The tribunal, therefore, granted Onifade’s reliefs to move the application seeking leave to amend the originating summons.

    Moving the motion, he said the application dated June 17 was filed June 20.

    He said the process had a 10-paragraph affidavit deposed to by himself and supported with an exhibit.

    “The proposed amendment had been filed and served on the defendants. We pray that the proposed amendment be deemed properly filed, same having been served,” he said.

    In opposing the application, Agoro said he filed a written address on behalf of MultiChoice on June 17.

    According to him, the same written address was filed on June 17 but deemed as properly filed and served today.

    “We adopt the arguments contain in this written address in urging this honourable tribunal to dismiss the instant application as same lacks merit,” he said.

    Agoro, who described the application as “overreaching,” argued that Onifade failed to present sufficient materials to convince the tribunal.

    Counsel for the FCCPC (2nd defendant), Tam Tamuno, said though he was not opposing the application for amendment, he said the texture of the complaints filed by Onifade had changed.

    “The first originating process did not contain any reliefs against the second defendant whereas the second amended version is seeking some prayers against the second defendant,” he said.

    Tanumo also said that the earlier affidavit had just 15 paragraphs but the fresh affidavit contained 23 paragraphs.

    The lawyer then stated that though he would not oppose Onifade’s application for amendment, “we will require time to file our reaction to the new issues that have been raised by the fresh application.”

    Responding, Onifade urged the tribunal to discountenance the arguments of the two defendants

    According to him, it is the law that where a defendant intends to controvert an affidavit-based evidence, such defendant must, as a point of law, filed a counter affidavit.

    He argued that where a defendant failed to file a counter affidavit, it would be deemed that all the averments in the application are not opposed, citing previous cases to back his arguments.

    Delivering a ruling, the tribunal held that where amendment enables counsel to correct errors, mistakes in his application in the interest of justice without prejudice to other parties, such application ought to be granted.

    Citing different authorities to support the ruling, the tribunal said “the fundamental object of litigation is to decide the rights of parties, and not citing mistakes of parties..”

    “In conclusion, though the 1st defendant put up serious argument, he does not point out any injustice he will suffer in this and he did not file a counter affidavit to the application,” the tribunal said.

    The tribunal, subsequently, granted the leave for the claimants to amend their originating summons and deemed it to have been properly filed.

    It then adjourned the matter until July 21 for hearing.

    In the new originating summons, the claimants also sought a declaration that the tariffs increase in products and services “in respect of the 1st defendant and any other subsequent proposed increase of April 1 without prior resolution of the claimants’ petitions to the 2nd defendant is null and void and of no effect whatsoever.

    “An order of this honourable tribunal directing and mandating the 1s defendant to reverse back to the price regime prior to the price and products increase prior of April, 2020.

    “An order of this honourable tribunal directing and mandating the 1st defendant to adopt to PAY-AS-YOU-VIEW model of billing for all its products and services forthwith.

    “An order of this honourable tribunal directing and mandating the defendants jointly and or severally, to pay the claimants the sum of N10, 000,000.00 (Ten Million Naira) only for general damages resulting from all manner of psychological traumas, hardship and the continuous violation of the claimant’s and compensation for various anti-consumer’s acts.

    “An order of this honourable tribunal directing and mandating the defendants jointly and or severally to pay N1, 000,000.00 (One Million Naira) only as cost of this suit.”

  • Suit to stop MultiChoice from hiking DStv, GOtv subscriptions suffers setback

    Suit to stop MultiChoice from hiking DStv, GOtv subscriptions suffers setback

    Hearing in a suit filed by a lawyer, Festus Onifade and Coalition of Nigeria Consumers (CNC) to stop MultiChoice Nigeria Limited from hiking DStv and GOtv subscriptions on Thursday suffered a setback.

    TheNewsGuru.com (TNG) reports the development occurred following an application for an adjournment moved by Onifade, who is the 1st claimant in the suit.

    He prayed for an adjournment shortly after the three-member tribunal headed by Thomas Okosun began sitting, hinging his application on ill-health.

    Recall that the tribunal had on March 30 in an ex-parte motion marked CCPT/OP/1/2022 moved by Onifade on behalf of himself and the CNC restrained MultiChoice from increasing its prices on DStv and Gotv pending the hearing and determination of the matter.

    Onifade and CNC (2nd claimant) had dragged the company and Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (FCCPC) before the tribunal on March 30 as first and second defendants respectively.

    MultiChoice had on March 21, announced its intention to increase the subscription fees for its packages beginning from April 1, blaming inflation and business operations for the increment.

    Against the order of the tribunal, the firm was alleged to have gone ahead with the increment.

    But when the matter came up on April 11, the tribunal ordered MultiChoice to revert to old prices of its packages, pending the hearing and determination of the substantive matter and adjourned till today.

    At the resumed hearing on Wednesday, Onifade informed that though the case was scheduled for hearing of the applications bordering on jurisdiction of the tribunal to hear the suit, he was indisposed.

    The lawyer, therefore, sought for an adjournment.

    “I have to take permission from my doctor to be here my lord. I will be asking for a short day,” he said.

    Counsel to MultiChoice, Jamiu.Agoro, and lawyer to FCCPC, Tam Tamunokobia, did not oppose the application.

    The tribunal, headed by Okosun, reminded that the panel was not a regular court where adjournment could be sought frivolously.

    “So how long will you be asking for,?” Okosun asked.

    “June, my lord,” Onifade said.

    Okosun, who expressed surprise at Onifade’s request for a date in June, asked if the lawyer had intention to withdraw the suit.

    The tribunal then adjourned the matter until June 15 for hearing of the application challenging its jurisdiction.

    MultiChoice had in a motion on notice dated April 13 and filed April 14 by Toyin Pinheiro, SAN, prayed the tribunal for an order staying execution of the order it made on April 11 pending the determination of the instant application.

    It also sought an order setting aside and discharging the order the tribunal made on April 11 having been made without jurisdiction.

    But the claimants disagreed with the firm’s prayers, urging the tribunal to dismiss them.

    In a counter affidavit dated and filed April 26 by Onifade and CNC, the claimants argued that the prayers in the application filed by the firm were similar to the one it earlier filed on March 31, “and know that both prayers are incongruous”.

  • DStv, Gotv subscription: Tribunal orders MultiChoice to revert to old prices

    DStv, Gotv subscription: Tribunal orders MultiChoice to revert to old prices

    A Federal Competition and Consumer Protection (FCCPC) Tribunal sitting in Abuja, on Monday, directed MultiChoice Nigeria Limited, the operators of DStv and Gotv, to maintain status quo of its March 30 order pending the hearing and determination of the substantive matter.

    The three-member tribunal headed by Thomas Okosun gave the order following an oral application for adjournment moved by counsel for the firm, Jamiu Agoro, to enable him respond to counter affidavit and written address, including the contempt charge, filed against his client.

    The claimants; Festus Onifade, a legal practitioner, and Coalition of Nigeria Consumers, on behalf of himself and others, had sued the company and Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (FCCPC) as 1st and 2nd respondents respectively.

    They had prayed the tribunal for an order, restraining the firm from increasing its services and other products on April 1, pending the hearing and determination of the motion on notice dated and filed on March 30, and the tribunal granted the ex-parte motion, directing parties to maintain status quo ante bellum.

    When the matter was called, Onfifade informed that the matter was slated for the hearing of the motion on notice, seeking a perpetual restraining order against the firm pending the determination of the suit.

    He said he filed a counter affidavit against a motion filed by the company challenging the jurisdiction of the tribunal to hear their application.

    Besides, the lawyer said they filed a written address and contempt proceedings against the Managing Director of MultiChoice, John Ugbe, and its directors for them to show cause why they should not be committed to prison for alleged disregard of panel’s order made on March 30.

    Counsel for MultiChoice, Jamiu Agoro, acknowledged the receipt of all the processes filed by the claimants.

    “On behalf of the 1st defendant/respondent, we filed an application praying this honourable court for an order staying execution of that order made by this honourable tribunal on March 30,” he said.

    The panel head, Okosun, told Agoro that since the tribunal was not a regular court, he would not entertain issues that could determine the subject matter.

    “It is necessary we do this so that we can dispense with this case as mush as possible,” he said.

    The tribunal, who said since the lawyer acknowledged receipt of claimants’ applications, it said: “Have you obeyed? If you have not, why?”

    But Agoro said: “As a tribunal, I just want to read out a prayer which will lead us to other issues.”

    He said counter affidavit and written address by the claimants in response to their counter were just served on them today.

    He had made some denials and allegations which we would have to respond to.

    He said the contempt proceeding was also served on him this morning and he also intended to respond.

    Agoro said he had filed an application challenging the jurisdiction of the tribunal to hear the matter.

    Okosun further asked the lawyer if the firm disobeyed the order made.

    Responding, Agoro said: ” as much as the questions which the tribunal has posed, the issue has been where there is an order of court and an aggrieved party who had either applied to set aside that order or had exercise its rights of appeal against that order, such party cannot be held to be in contempt of that order.”

    He cited previous cases to back his arguments.

    “So on that basis, as contained in this authorities and avalanche of others, we submit that we are not in contempt of order of this honourable tribunal,” he said.

    He said in view of his application challenging the jurisdiction of the tribunal, “this court is to first inquire whether it has the jurisdiction to determine the application.”

    He argued that the only jurisdiction the tribunal had was to hear and determine his application challenging the jurisdiction, ciiting previous cases.

    He restated that where there were several applications pending before the court, the application on jurisdiction should be taken first.

    “On this basis, I humbly urge my lord to afford us time to react to their counter affidavit and written address so that we can react appropriate.

    “My application before this honourable tribunal is premised on the decision of the court of appeal, that in view of the counter affidavit and written address that I have just been served on behalf of the claimants and considering the assertions and defences contained in same process, we will be forced to ask for an adjournment, particularly to enable us file a reply against these processes,” he said.

    Lawyer to the 2nd respondent (FCCPC), Tam Tamuno, also indicated his intention to file a counter affidavit in response to the claimants’ motions.

    Tanumo said though his client was sued as a nominal defendant, “as a result, there is no prayer against the 2nd defendant in the originating process.

    “We are therefore concerned that justice is done in this matter. That is what we own our teaming consumers by this honourable tribunal,” he said.

    He said he had received all the processes filed, including the application by the firm challenging the jurisdiction of the tribunal.

    “Today, as cousel for the claimants has said, we received the motion to show cause and the counter affidavit.

    “In view of the fact that we have plethora of motions, we will like to express our intention to file a counter affidavit,” he said.

    “Finally, I spoke about housekeeping when I started and I think it is important for this tribunal to decide this motion challenging jurisdiction first,” he said.

    Tanumo, who urged the tribunal to take jurisdiction motion first, submitted “that in taking that decision, the 1st defendant should also be cautioned pending the hearing of the motion on jurisdiction and my learner’s friend motion to show cause that nothing should be done to distort the status quo. I so submit.

    ”As it is, the status quo is as it is today. Until this court finds why they are in contempt and that they have not shown cause,” he said.

    Okosun then asked Tanumo: “If an order is giving that they should not do anything, assuming they have gone ahead to do that, are we going to maintain a status quo in defiance of order of the court?”

    The lawyer responded this: “I mean the status quo as at March 30 and that this court should look into it first whether contempt has been established.”

    However, Onifade said Tanumo was double speaking.

    He noted that the agency (2nd defendant) had filed a memorandum of appearance.

    He asked if Tanumo would withdraw this to file a counter affidavit.

    “There very last submission shows they are double speaking which shows double standard.

    “What is the status quo as at today? They have not furnish the court with the position. And I don’t think it is the 2nd defendant that is in position to furnish the court with this; it is the 1st respondent,” he said.

    According to him, the counsel doubles speak when he says the status quo be maintained as at today,

    “Clearly speaking if it is maintained, this honourable panel will be in no need to continue sitting because they have completely overreached the panel,” he said.

    Onifade described the move as an act to set aside the order of tribunal through the back door.

    The lawyer also described the action of MultiChoice “as reprehensible, dangerous and tending towards anarchy because any society where there is no obedience to the law and order will not progress.”

    “In response to 1st respondent, we submit that they are invariably arguing their motion which they said they want to file,” he said.

    However, Agoro disagreed with him.

    “What is the status quo as at today?,” the tribunal asked again.

    Responding, Onifade said: “The position is clear and we are demonstrating that the 1st respondent has completely disregard and dare the honourable tribunal.

    “The status quo to be maintained is status quo ante bellum. But the position has changed.

    “The 1st defendant has gone ahead in defiance of this honourable court’s order to increase its tariffs,” he said.

    In a short ruling, Okosun ordered that the status quo be maintained ante bellum, pending the hearing and determination of the matter.

    “Having listened to arguments of counsel to parties and upon argument of counsel to 1st defendant and 2nd defendant for adjournment to enable them file their processes, this matter shall be adjourned.

    “Therefore, an order of March 30 still subsists and parties shall maintain status quo anta bellum,” he ruled.

    He adjourned the matter until May 5 for hearing.

  • DStv, Gotv subscription prices: Why we dragged MultiChoice to tribunal – Lawyer

    DStv, Gotv subscription prices: Why we dragged MultiChoice to tribunal – Lawyer

    A legal practitioner, Fesrus Onifade, has revealed real reason MultiChoice Nigeria Ltd. was dragged before Federal Competition and Consumer Protection (FCCPC) Tribunal sitting in Abuja to stop it from increasing its tariffs and cost of products from April 1.

    The three-member tribunal, presided over by Thomas Okosun had on Wednesday, ordered MultiChoice to restrain from increasing the DStv and Gotv subscription prices pending the hearing and the determination of the motion on notice before it.

    The tribunal then fixed April 11, for hearing the motion on notice.

    The development followed an ex-parte motion marked: CCPT/OP/1/2022 moved by Onifade on behalf of himself and the Coalition of Nigeria Consumers (claimants).

    Onifade had sued the company and Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (FCCPC) as 1st and 2nd respondents respectively.

    The motion ex-parte filed by the claimants on March 29 was brought pursuant to Section 39 (1) & (2) of FCCPC Act 2018; Order 26, Rule 5 (2), (3) & 26 Rule 6 (1) & (2) Federal High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules 2019 and

    Section 47(a), (b), (c),(d), of Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Act 2018.

    MultiChoice Nigeria Ltd., the operators of DStv and Gotv, had on March 21, announced its intention to increase the subscription fees for packages on both platforms.

    The firm, which blamed inflation and business operations for the increment, said the new fees would become effective on April 1.

    Onifade, in the affidavit of urgency attached to the ex-parte motion dated and filed March 29, deposed that prior to May 2020, when the company increased its tariffs, they petitioned FCCPC but the agency did not act on their letters.

    “The claimants had petitioned the 2nd respondent, FCCPC in the letters dated May 19, 2020, and July 2, 2020, in respect of increment which took effect sometimes in May 2020, which did not received due attention from the 2nd respondents till date.

    “That while the claimants’ petition was still pending before the 2nd respondent, the 1st respondent (MultiChoice Ltd.) went ahead to announce another price and product hike scheduled to take effect from April 1, 2022,” he said.

    He said FCCPC was yet to resolve the claimants’ complaint in respect of the May 2020 increment in tariffs which was still pending before it.

    “The 2nd respondent, FCCPC, neglect and deliberately refused to intervene in the said increment complained of in the claimants’ petition till date,” he said.

    The lawyer said he was a loyal and long time customer of MultiChoice with DStv account number: 41353565835.

    He said the application was because of the extreme urgency and time constraint before the date the increment would take effect.

    He told the tribunal that if the application was not granted, irreparable damage would have been done to the claimants’ interest.

    Onifade, who averred that the grant of the application would do substantial justice in the matter, said it would also be in the interest of justice to grant the prayers.

    According to him, the respondents will not be prejudiced by the grant of this application.

    The tribunal, which granted the reliefs sought in the ex-parte motion, fixed April 11, for hearing of the motion on notice.

    The National Assembly had also asked MultiChoice to reduce the prices of its packages owing to the prevailing economic circumstances of the country, calling on the firm to adopt the pay-as-you-go payment package option.

    NAN

  • Nigerians lament as MultiChoice hikes prices of GOtv, DStv packages

    Nigerians lament as MultiChoice hikes prices of GOtv, DStv packages

    Nigerians have flayed MultiChoice for increasing the prices of its DStv and GOtv packages after the South African company revealed that beginning from April 1, subscribers will start paying more for all its bouquets.

    The company made this known in a statement on Tuesday to the chagrin of Nigerians saying: “In light of the rising costs of inflation and business operations, we have had to review the price of our packages to keep delighting our customers with great entertainment, anytime and anywhere. Therefore, from April 1, 2022, a new pricing regime for both our DStv and GOtv packages will be in effect”.

    TheNewsGuru.com (TNG) reports MultiChoice Nigeria is the Nigerian subsidiary of MultiChoice Africa, owner of DStv and GOtv.

    Multichoice said its DStv package would now cost: Premium (N21,000); Compact + (N14,250); Compact (N9,000); Confam (N5,300); Yanga (N2,950); Padi (N2,150); Business (N2,669) and Xtraview + PVR access fee (N2,900).

    It said that the new prices for GOtv package were: Gotv Max for N4,150; GOtv Jolli for N2,800; GOtv Jinja for N1,900 and GOtv Lite for N900.

    To cushion the price adjustments, Multichoice said customers who pay on or before their due date (before April 1), would be eligible to pay the old price.

    Also, customers who pay consistently on time (before their due dates) for a period of 12 months, would also be eligible to pay the old price.

    “Customers who pay for 10 months upfront on the new price will get the 11th and 12th month free,” the company said.

    The company said the price adjustments would enable it to serve customers better.

    However, Nigerians did not find the development funny at all, coming at a time when they are battling with lack of electricity supply, fuel scarcity, rising inflation and dwindling income.

    Read reactions from Nigerians below:

  • BREAKING: FG orders GoTv, Startimes to migrate to FreeTV platform

    BREAKING: FG orders GoTv, Startimes to migrate to FreeTV platform

    The Federal Government says it has directed two PayTv platforms – GoTv and Startimes – to migrate their signals from self-carrying to any of the two licensed FreeTv signal distributors.

    The Minister of Information and Culture, Alhaji Lai Mohammed, who disclosed this on Thursday in Abuja, said the directive was in line with the Digital Switch Over (DSO) process.

    DSO is the process of transiting from analogue to digital terrestrial broadcasting and the country has set April 29 for the resumption of the roll out of the second phase in the remaining 31 states.

    The first phase of the roll out had covered the Federal Capital Territory and the five states of Plateau, Kaduna, Kwara, Osun and Enugu.

    According to the minister, the laws of the land recognises a single frequency network which is being operated by two licensed signal distributors – Integrated Television Services (ITS) and Pinnacle Communications.

    He said the two PayTv – Startimes and GoTv – which are currently carrying their respective signals, is in negation of the law and must migrate to any of the licensed signal distributors of their choice.

    “We have directed National Broadcasting Commission (NBC) to ask Gotv and Startimes to go to either Pinnacle of ITS.

    “They cannot carry their signals and that is the only way the licensed signal distributors can survive,’’ he said

    The minister gave an assurance that with the approval of N9.4 billion by the Federal Government and the setting up of a 14-member ministerial task force to drive the DSO process the remaining 31 states would be successfully and effectively covered.

    He said the DSO would enable Nigerians have the opportunity to have choices of many TV stations as well as have access to quality pictures and programmes with little annual cost and no monthly subscription.

    Mohammed said the plan for every state the DSO is being rolled out is to cover at least 70 per cent population coverage with Digital Terrestrial Transmission (DTT) while the remaining areas would be covered by Direct To Home (DTH).

    He pledged that no part of the country would be left out without DSO signal before the final Analogue Switch Off

    Speaking on contents on the FreeTv platform, the minister said the government would set up Local Content Development Fund to assist talented young artists and content developers as well as enable budding stations to thrive.

    He said part of the fund would also be used to assist veteran actors and notable celebrities to procure special licenses to either have their own channels or programmes.

  • DStv, GOtv undergoing upgrade, not hacked – Official

    DStv, GOtv undergoing upgrade, not hacked – Official

    Contrary to the viral tweet that the Pay-TV platforms DStv and GOtv have been hacked, a representative of the company who pleaded anonymity said that the platforms were not hacked but undergoing a system maintenance.

    MultiChoice Nigeria had earlier in the week sent messages to subscribers that there will be a system upgrade.

    The message read: “We will be upgrading our systems from 11 pm, 17 October until 4pm, 19 October. This is to ensure improved system reliability. Access to your favourite channels will not be affected, however payment, self-service will not be available.”

    On Twitter, where the news has gone viral, users say that all channels available on the platforms are now free to watch irrespective of the subscription bouquet.

    The news is attributed to the Hackers Collective Anonymous who have in the past few days hacked websites of multiple government agencies as support to the #EndSARS movement.

    MultiChoice Nigeria is expected to put an official statement on their social media channels soon.

  • Nigerians to pay more for DStv, GOtv subscriptions as MultiChoice hikes rates today

    Nigerians to pay more for DStv, GOtv subscriptions as MultiChoice hikes rates today

    Following MultiChoice’s announcement to adjust subscriptions, subscribers are to pay more to view channels on DStv and GOtv networks with effect from Monday (today).

    MultiChoice in a statement by its Chief Executive Officer, John Ugbe said the price adjustment was arrived at after careful consideration of the market and a review of its business operations.

    “We have made efforts to contain any price adjustments on subscription prices. However, to ensure the sustainability of the business, we have to consider financial impacts, including inflation as well as increased content and operational costs,” Ugbe said in the statement.

    “As such, we have reviewed the prices of some of our bouquets so that we can continue to survive as a business and bring quality entertainment to our customers.

    “To arrive at the decision to adjust prices, we took into account many factors, including the impact on the customer, current inflation, content costs and efficiencies within the company.”

    Ugbe said the packages will continue to be available at varying pricing points to allow subscribers flexibility in price and choice without compromising quality or variety.

    “To this end, only the prices of some of the bouquets have been reviewed upwards while the lower bouquets have been left untouched,” he added.

  • Court insists Multi Choice obeys order halting DSTV, GOTV tariff increase

    A Federal High Court in Abuja has insisted that its order halting the implementation of the recent price increases announced by digital satellite television services provider, MultiChoice Communications (DSTV) remains.

    Justice Nnamdi Dimgba made the clarification on Tuesday upon complaint by lawyer to the Federal Government, Babatunde Irukera that the company has declined to obey the order made ex-parte on August 20 this year.

    The judge said: “My order is in force. I believe it is in force until it is set aside. My order has to be obeyed. That is my position.”

    The Consumer Protection Council (CPC) sued, on behalf of the Federal Government, challenging the propriety of the latest price increases announced by MultiChoice for its services.

    Details later…

  • Multichoice appeals court order, insists on new tariffs for DSTV, GoTV

    Sequel to a court judgement restraining MultiChoice Nigeria from implementing its proposed increase in subscription fee, the company on said on Friday filed an appeal against the order of the Federal High Court in Abuja.

    But, the Consumer Protection Council (CPC) insists the order of the high court stopping implementation of the new tariffs will subsist till the appeal has been heard and ruling given by the court.

    Recall that Justice Nnamdi Dimgba of the Federal High Court, Abuja issued had on Monday issued an order restraining the cable television broadcasting company, its agents or representatives from going ahead with the increment of subscription rates till further notice.

    The order followed an application filed on behalf of the Nigerian government by the CPC in case No. FHC/ABJ/CS/894 to stop any upward review of subscription fees for DSTV and GoTV services.

    Early last month, MultiChoice Nigeria announced its decision to review upwards the monthly subscription rates for its cable television services, namely DSTV and GoTV, with effect from August 1.

    Under the new price regime, the company said the Premium package subscribers pay about 7.5 per cent more (about N15,800) from about N14,700 every month.

    Also, their Compact Plus customers were to pay N10,650, from N9,900; Compact bouquets N6,800, from N6,300, while the Family package was increased from N3,800 to N4,000, with Access from N1,900 to N2,000.

    However, the Director-General of the CPC, Babatunde Irukera, who led other concerned Nigerians to file the application, said in the statement of claims before the court that the action by Multichoice Nigeria contravened an ongoing investigation.

    Other applicants who signed a nine-paragraphs statement of claims included Abimbola Ojenike, Eme David-Ojugo, Moray Adebayo, Teniola Medupin and Florence Abebe.

    In his ruling on Monday, Justice Dimgba said the interim injunction restraining Multichoice Nigeria or its agents and representatives was to halt its “continuing implementation of any increase in subscription rates or price review policy imposing increased charges and costs on the consumers pending the determination of the motion on notice.”

    Also, Multichoice Nigeria was “restrained from further carrying on or continuing any conduct or activity which interferes with or has effect of circumventing the outcome of ongoing investigations by the CPC into the company’s compliance or non-compliance with the February 16, 2016 order pending the determination of the motion on notice.”

    Regardless, MultiChoice Nigeria in a statement on Friday confirmed it was served with an interim order by the Federal High Court regarding the price adjustment it implemented on August 1, 2018.