The Competition and Consumer Protection Tribunal has dismissed the settlement terms and consent order involving Coca-Cola Nigeria Limited (CCNL) and the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (FCCPC).
This follows the Commission’s withdrawal of its N186 million mislabeling penalty initially imposed on CCNL over deceptive trade descriptions.
The ruling and judgement were 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 marketing practices, among other issues, in Nigeria.
Nairametrics previously reported that the FCCPC formally accused Coca-Cola Nigeria Ltd and its sister company of using misleading trade descriptions and unfair marketing tactics for their products “Original Taste” and “Less Sugar.”
The Commission stated that it found NBC applying allegedly deceptive trade descriptions to the two variants and distributing them to consumers, violating Section 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 before September 6, 2024, for the alleged contravention of relevant laws.
Legal Dispute
In its appeal, CCNL’s legal team, led by Professor Gbolahan Elias (SAN), asked the tribunal to set aside the FCCPC’s orders and restrain the Commission from enforcing any provisions of its Final and Supplementary Orders against the appellant.
- He cited concerns over fair hearing, lack of jurisdiction, and the fact that the company’s products were approved by the National Agency for Food and Drug Administration and Control (NAFDAC).
- However, FCCPC counsel Abimbola Ojenike raised 13 grounds opposing the brand’s request to nullify the penalty and accusations.
He argued that Coca-Cola’s claims of procedural unfairness and bias were unfounded, emphasizing that the company had ample opportunities for a fair hearing, including participating in investigations, submitting written statements, and attending multiple consultative meetings.
Tribunal’s Judgment
At the resumed judgment on Wednesday, CCNL’s counsel, G. Abubakar, informed the tribunal that after the hearing on March 18, 2025, the appellant and respondent (FCCPC) continued settlement discussions.
- He apologized for bringing the tribunal’s attention to the matter at this stage.
“I must sincerely apologize to the tribunal for the trouble of writing the judgment,” he said.
- He noted that the FCCPC had issued a consent order dated April 24, 2025, pursuant to Section 149 of the FCCPA Act 2018.
“Both the appellant and the respondent (FCCPC) also filed terms of settlement dated April 24, 2025,” he added, stating that the notices were filed with the tribunal on April 29, 2025.
While adopting the notices, he argued that the development aligns with the provisions of the FCCPA and other relevant laws.
FCCPC’s lawyer, Ojenike, confirmed receiving the documents — the terms of settlement and the notice of the consent order dated April 29, 2025 — from CCNL’s legal team.
“We have also confirmed the execution of the consent order in a communication from the FCCPC’s Director of Legal Services, A.W. Achimugu,” he added.
He noted that the communication reflected the FCCPC’s intent regarding the development.
In his ruling, Okosu observed that the terms of settlement between FCCPC and CCNL were not consistent with a proper and legally acceptable application.
“The notice of settlement contains arguments irrelevant to the instant case,” he said, noting they referenced an associated matter.
- He acknowledged that while regulators are encouraged to settle cases, such settlements must serve the public interest and not limit regulatory responsibilities.
- He said the settlement appeared to be an attempt to “arrest” the tribunal’s judgment, particularly following its recent ruling against the Nigerian Bottling Company Limited (NBC), which holds the Coca-Cola bottling franchise.
“These terms of settlement are not supported by law nor are they in the public interest,” the tribunal said, describing the development as “troubling.”
- The judge noted that a penalty had been imposed on Coca-Cola for wrongdoing, yet the company secured a settlement with the FCCPC on a “no-fault basis.”
- He also questioned why the FCCPC removed the N186 million penalty and replaced it with a N198 million reimbursement to the Commission without offering an explanation.
“The stubbornness in the filings by the parties is grave,” the judge stated, as he dismissed the terms 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 also determined that CCNL was granted a fair hearing during the FCCPC’s five-year investigation, which included multiple meetings with the company, contradicting the appellant’s claims.
- He agreed with the FCCPC’s position that Coca-Cola misled Nigerian consumers through deceptive trade descriptions, even if the products were NAFDAC-approved.
- The tribunal subsequently dismissed CCNL’s appeal for lacking merit and ordered the company to pay the N186 million penalty within 60 days.
What You Should Know
Nairametrics earlier reported that the FCCPC had committed to the Competition and Consumer Protection Tribunal that it would not take any “regulatory or enforcement action” against Coca-Cola Nigeria Ltd pending the outcome of the company’s appeal.
On April 28, 2025, the CCPT had also ordered NBC to pay the FCCPC N190 million as a mislabeling penalty.
