The Federal High Court sitting in Abuja has upheld the authority of the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (FCCPC) to investigate consumer complaints concerning airline ticket pricing, ruling that the Commission’s investigative mandate is separate from its statutory power to regulate or fix prices.
The judgment represents a significant legal victory for the consumer protection agency in its dispute with Air Peace Limited, which had challenged the Commission’s authority to investigate allegations relating to increases in the airline’s ticket fares.
The FCCPC disclosed the outcome in a statement issued on Friday by its Director of Corporate Affairs, Ondaje Ijagwu.
According to the Commission, Justice B.F.M. Nyako, in a judgment delivered on June 29, dismissed Air Peace’s suit, which questioned the FCCPC’s legal authority to investigate complaints over what consumers described as exploitative airfare pricing.
The decision follows an earlier ruling delivered in April 2026 by Justice James Omotosho, who also rejected another suit filed by Air Peace challenging the Commission’s powers to investigate consumer complaints and issue summons while carrying out its statutory functions.
The Commission stated, “The Abuja Federal High Court has affirmed the statutory authority of the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission to investigate consumer complaints relating to pricing of airline tickets. The court clarified that the Commission’s investigative powers under the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Act (FCCPA, 2018) are distinct from the exercise of a power to regulate price.”
The legal dispute originated from a lawsuit instituted by Air Peace in 2025 after the FCCPC requested information from the airline in January of that year following widespread complaints from passengers over significant increases in ticket prices on several domestic routes during the 2024 Christmas travel period.
Air Peace argued that the FCCPC lacked the legal authority to investigate airfare pricing unless the President had first invoked the provisions of the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Act relating to price regulation.
The airline consequently sought judicial declarations that the Commission had no jurisdiction to examine airfare pricing and requested perpetual orders restraining the FCCPC from conducting such investigations.
Justice Nyako, however, rejected those arguments, holding that the Commission acted within the powers granted to it under Sections 17, 32 and 33 of the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Act when it sought information from the airline in response to consumer complaints.
The court ruled that the FCCPC’s request formed part of a legitimate fact-finding process and did not amount to price regulation or an attempt to exercise the statutory price control powers contained in Sections 88, 89 and 90 of the Act.
According to the court, the Commission did not direct Air Peace to reduce ticket prices, prescribe a pricing formula, fix airfare or declare the airline’s pricing structure unlawful.
Justice Nyako further held that accepting Air Peace’s interpretation of the law would effectively prevent the FCCPC from investigating pricing-related complaints unless the President had first activated the Act’s price regulation provisions.
The judge noted that such an interpretation would weaken the Commission’s investigative responsibilities and could not have reflected the intention of the National Assembly when the law was enacted.
Reacting to the judgment, the Executive Vice Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of the FCCPC, Tunji Bello, described the ruling as another judicial affirmation of the Commission’s responsibility to protect consumers and ensure fair competition across markets.
“The Court has again affirmed an important principle under the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Act. Investigating consumer complaints is fundamentally different from regulating prices. The FCCPC neither sought to fix nor regulate Air Peace’s fares. It simply exercised its lawful authority to obtain information as part of an investigation into a matter of legitimate consumer concern.
“An investigation is a fact-finding process. It is neither a finding of liability nor an enforcement action. Every responsible regulator must be able to inquire into credible complaints affecting consumers and markets without those inquiries being misconstrued as findings of liability, enforcement action or price regulation,” he said.
Bello reiterated the Commission’s commitment to carrying out its statutory responsibilities transparently, fairly and in strict compliance with the rule of law.
The FCCPC has intensified enforcement of the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Act in recent years by investigating complaints across sectors including aviation, telecommunications, financial services, digital platforms and consumer goods.
Earlier this week, President Bola Tinubu directed the Commission to investigate major global technology companies and Generative Artificial Intelligence platforms over allegations of anti-competitive practices and the unauthorised use of content belonging to Nigerian media organisations.
The Commission has consistently maintained that its mandate is to protect consumers from exploitative business practices, promote healthy competition and investigate complaints where there are reasonable grounds to believe consumers or market competition may be adversely affected.
The dispute with Air Peace followed widespread complaints from passengers over sharp increases in domestic airfares during the 2024 festive season, prompting the FCCPC to seek information from the airline as part of its statutory investigation.
