The Wireless Application Service Providers Association of Nigeria (WASPAN) has approached the Court of Appeal to challenge the judgment of the Federal High Court in Lagos, which upheld the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission’s (FCCPC) powers in relation to its Digital Economy and Online Non-Interest (DEON) Consumer Lending Regulations.
In a Notice of Appeal dated July 21, 2026, the association is asking the appellate court to set aside the judgment delivered by Justice A. L. Allagoa on July 20, 2026, dismissing its Originating Summons.
The appeal was filed by the appellant’s legal team, led by Oluwakemi A. Pinheiro, SAN, of Pinheiro LP.
WASPAN urged the Court of Appeal to allow the appeal, set aside the judgment of the Federal High Court, and grant all the reliefs sought in its Originating Summons filed on April 14, 2026.
The association formulated nine grounds of appeal, contending that the trial court misinterpreted key provisions of the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Act (FCCPA), 2018, and wrongly affirmed the FCCPC’s regulatory powers over operators within the telecommunications sector.
A central plank of the appeal is the contention that the lower court erred in holding that Section 2(1) of the FCCPA is economy-wide legislation without recognising the statutory limitation created by the phrase “as may be indicated otherwise.”
According to the appellant, Section 90 of the Nigerian Communications Act, 2003, expressly vests the Nigerian Communications Commission (NCC) with exclusive responsibility for promoting fair competition and protecting consumers within the telecommunications industry, thereby limiting the FCCPC’s jurisdiction over that sector.
WASPAN argued that the trial court failed to appreciate that where a sector-specific regulator has been granted statutory responsibility, the FCCPC’s powers must yield to that specialised regulatory framework.
The association also challenged the lower court’s interpretation of Section 163 of the FCCPA, arguing that the provision does not confer unlimited powers on the FCCPC to issue regulations governing every commercial activity.
It maintained that the Commission’s regulation-making powers are confined to matters expressly contemplated by the Act and that the DEON Consumer Lending Regulations fall outside those statutory limits.
The appellant further contended that although the trial court held that the FCCPC lacks the power to regulate or take over the statutory functions of the NCC and also lacks licensing powers, it nonetheless dismissed the Originating Summons, a position WASPAN described as legally inconsistent.
Specifically, the association challenged Paragraph 7 of the DEON Regulations, which requires its members to obtain the FCCPC’s approval before engaging in consumer lending services.
According to WASPAN, the requirement effectively grants the FCCPC licensing powers over businesses operating within the telecommunications industry, contrary to the provisions of the Nigerian Communications Act.
The association argued that, having found that the Commission lacks statutory licensing powers, the lower court ought to have declared Paragraph 7 of the Regulations ultra vires, null, and void.
WASPAN further submitted that the FCCPC exceeded the powers conferred on it under the FCCPA by extending its regulatory reach into matters reserved exclusively for the NCC.
It also faulted the trial court’s reliance on Section 104 of the FCCPA, arguing that the provision cannot be interpreted as overriding the sector-specific regulatory regime established under the Nigerian Communications Act.
According to the appellant, established principles of statutory interpretation require that where a specific law and a general law regulate the same subject matter, the specific legislation prevails to the extent of any inconsistency.
The appeal also raises constitutional issues, with WASPAN arguing that the DEON Regulations unlawfully interfere with its members’ rights to freedom of association and contractual autonomy guaranteed under Section 40 of the Constitution.
The association maintained that its members have the constitutional right to freely associate, select, and collaborate with intermediaries and service providers, and that such rights cannot be curtailed by subsidiary legislation.
In its reliefs, WASPAN asked the Court of Appeal to allow the appeal, set aside the judgment of Justice Allagoa delivered on July 20, 2026, and grant all the reliefs sought in its Originating Summons.
WASPAN has also filed a motion for an injunction restraining the FCCPC from enforcing the DEON Consumer Lending Regulations pending the hearing and determination of the appeal.
