TICKET PRICING: AGAIN, FCCPC FLOORS AIR PEACE

The Federal High Court in Abuja has reaffirmed the statutory authority of the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (FCCPC) to investigate consumer complaints relating to airline ticket pricing, ruling that such investigations are separate from the Commission’s power to regulate prices.

In a judgment delivered on June 29, Justice B.F.M. Nyako dismissed a suit filed by Air Peace Limited challenging the FCCPC’s authority to investigate complaints over alleged exploitative ticket pricing. The court held that the Commission acted within the powers granted to it under the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Act (FCCPA), 2018.
The decision aligns with an earlier judgment delivered in April 2026 by Justice James Omotosho, who also dismissed a similar suit by Air Peace questioning the Commission’s powers to investigate consumer complaints and issue summons in the discharge of its statutory responsibilities.
The latest ruling stemmed from a suit instituted by Air Peace in 2025 after the FCCPC requested information from the airline in January 2025 following widespread consumer complaints over significant increases in airfares on some domestic routes in December 2024.
Air Peace had argued that the FCCPC could not investigate airfare pricing unless the President first invoked the price regulation provisions of the FCCPA. The airline sought declarations that the Commission lacked the legal authority to conduct such an inquiry and requested an order permanently restraining it from doing so.
Justice Nyako, however, rejected the airline’s arguments, ruling that the FCCPC lawfully exercised its investigative powers under Sections 17, 32 and 33 of the FCCPA by requesting information from the airline in response to consumer complaints.
The court held that the Commission’s request formed part of a legitimate investigation and did not amount to the exercise of price regulation or price control powers under Sections 88, 89 and 90 of the Act.
The judgment further noted that the FCCPC neither directed Air Peace to reduce its fares nor prescribed any pricing formula, imposed prices or declared the airline’s fares unlawful.
Justice Nyako also held that accepting Air Peace’s interpretation would effectively prevent the Commission from investigating pricing-related complaints unless the President first invoked Section 88 of the FCCPA. According to the court, such an interpretation would undermine the Commission’s investigative mandate and could not have been the intention of the legislature.
Reacting to the judgment, the Executive Vice Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of the FCCPC, Mr. Tunji Bello, described the ruling as a significant judicial affirmation of the Commission’s statutory responsibility to investigate market conduct where there are reasonable grounds to believe consumers or competition may be adversely affected.
He said the court had once again affirmed that investigating consumer complaints is fundamentally different from regulating prices, stressing that the FCCPC neither sought to fix nor regulate Air Peace’s fares but merely exercised its lawful authority to obtain information as part of an investigation into legitimate consumer concerns.
According to Bello, an investigation is a fact-finding process and should not be mistaken for a finding of liability, enforcement action or price regulation. He added that every responsible regulator must be able to examine credible complaints affecting consumers and markets without such inquiries being misconstrued.
He said the judgment provides important judicial clarity on the scope of the FCCPC’s investigative powers while confirming that statutory price regulation remains subject to a separate legal framework under the FCCPA.
Bello reaffirmed the Commission’s commitment to carrying out its statutory responsibilities fairly, transparently and in accordance with the rule of law.