A Federal High Court, Lagos, on Thursday said
that Digital Satellite Television (DStv) had the
right to increase its subscription rate as it did
last month.


Justice Chukwujekwu Aneke then struck out a
suit filed by some aggrieved subscribers
challenging the company’s recent 20 per cent
increment on subscription.
The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that
DStv is being operated by Multi-Choice Nigeria
Ltd.


The aggrieved subscribers: Messrs Osasuyi
Adebayo and Oluyinka Oyeniji, who are also
lawyers, had filed the class action on behalf of
themselves and all other DStv subscribers across
the country.


The plaintiffs had sought an order of the court
restraining Multi-Choice from implementing the
20 per cent increment on DStv subscription rate
which began on April 1.


Justice Chukwujekwu Aneke, in a ruling, upheld
the preliminary objection filed by Multi-Choice,
and ruled that the suit amounted to an abuse of
court process.


The judge rejected an argument by the plaintiffs
that Multi-Choice should not to be given right of
audience having failed to abide by an earlier ex-
parte order of the court restraining the company
from implementing the increment.
Aneke said the court was bound to entertain
arguments from all parties before it, irrespective
of the alleged violation of the court order.
He further ruled that the suit disclosed no
reasonable cause of action, as the plaintiffs were
not under any obligation to continue to subscribe
to the services of Multi-Choice in the face of the
increment.


Meanwhile, the judge upheld Multi-Choice’s
argument that the suit failed to comply with
mandatory provisions of Sections 97 and 98 of
the Sherrifs and Civil Processes Act.


The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that
the sections stipulate that a writ to be served
outside jurisdiction must be concurrently issued.
The plaintiffs, through their counsel, Mr Yemi
Salma, had urged the court to discountenance
such argument, as Section 19 of the Federal
High Court Act, had clearly defined the
jurisdiction of the court to be one within Nigeria.


Salma had further urged the court not to punish
any irregularity in the issuance of the writ on the
plaintiffs, as such emanated from the court.
He also stated that such irregularity could be
corrected by the court in doing substantial
justice.


However, the judge rejected the plaintiffs’
argument, and upheld the objection.
He was also silent on an argument by the
plaintiffs that the objection should be treated as
a demurrer, which has been abolished from the
rules of court.


Demurrer is an attempt by a defendant to get
dismissal of a suit without filing any process to
the substantive issues.


In the instant suit, Multi-Choice only filed
preliminary objection, and did not file any
process against the substantive suit.
The News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reports that
the judge had earlier rejected an attempt by a
human rights lawyer, Mr Ebun-Olu Adegboruwa,
to opt out of the suit.


Adegboruwa had filed an application to be joined
as a co-plaintiff, but later filed an application to
opt out.


Aneke, however, said he was persuaded by a
Supreme Court decision which stated that once
an objection was raised challenging jurisdiction,
the court was duty bound to first determine the
objection before entertaining any other
application.


According to the suit, the plaintiffs had sought
an order of the court compelling the NBC to
regulate the activities of Multi-Choice so as to
prevent what they described as an arbitrary
increment in subscription rates.


They specifically urged the court to impress it on
the NBC to be alive to its statutory responsibility
by ensuring that Multi-Choice is compelled to
implement the pay-per-view scheme in Nigeria.
They said that with that subscribers would only
pay for programmes they watched, as was done
in other parts of the world where Multi-Choice
operated.


But Multi-Choice, through its lawyer, Moyosore
Onigbanjo, argued that the plaintiffs had no
cause of action, adding that a court did not have
the power to regulate the price of services that
a business was offering to its customers.
It said that neither the government nor the court
could regulate prices in Nigeria, being a country
that operates a free-market economy.
Multi Choice also said that under its conditions
of agreement, especially clauses 40 and 41, it
was free to change the fees payable by
subscribers for the services it was offering them.
(NAN)

http://www.vanguardngr.com/2015/05/court-upholds-dstvs-20-increment-on-subscription/#sthash.4oPgoDMq.dpuf

Who's deceiving who?


Dstv already said court has no power to stop the increment.

Ok

i still recharged my go-tv yesterday at 1800, i hope its true

Na wa for dis country ooo ...d choice is there for individual to make, u have other option available to make e.g Gotv which is more cheaper. Most people doesn't stay at home to watch d so called DSTV, some are just wasting money for subscribing because they don't enjoy d money...its better people start going for d cheaper ones