Court Rejects $1bn Suit against Lottery Commission | Nairalaw

A Federal High Court sitting in Abuja has dismissed the suit
filed by the Nigeria Employer’s Consultative Association (1st
plaintiff) and Nigeria Breweries Plc. (2nd plaintiff) against the
National Lottery Regulatory Commission (NLRC) on whether sales
promotion fall within the regulatory purview of the commission.

In his decision, the presiding judge, Justice Taiwo Taiwo
declared that the two views formulated by the National Lottery
Regulatory Commission) could conveniently resolve the dispute and
accommodate all the arguments of the parties.

He cited the issues as follows: “Whether National Lottery Act of
2005 and National Lottery Regulation 2007 are laws made within the
legislative competence of the National Assembly and whether sales
promotion by companies fall within the definition of National
Lotteries and therefore subject to the regulation of the NLRC.”

He, first, held that the National Lottery Act of 2005 was in no
doubt enacted by the National Assembly by the powers vested on the
National Assembly to make laws as provided by the constitution.

He said, “It will, therefore, be wrong to declare that the
National Lottery Act was enacted in violation of the constitution.
The National Lottery Regulation 2007 was made by the governing
board of the National Lottery Regulatory Commission with the
consent of the President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria as
provided in section 55(1) of the National Lottery Act.

“As such, if these laws were made in violation of the 1999
Constitution, it will not have seen the light of the day. To this
end, I answer issue 1, I distilled from the issues on this point in
favour of the defendants,” the presiding judge declared. He, also,
said the processes filed by the plaintiffs in this suits revealed
that sales promotion carried out by them had all the essential
elements of a lottery scheme or arrangement.

He added that the argument of the plaintiff that it did not sell
tickets to participants was of no merit because the right to
participate in the promo was limited to the customers who
participated in the business of the 2nd plaintiff within a
specified period of time.

He, therefore, held that sales promotion activities of the
plaintiffs for all intent and purposes “falls within the purview
and amount to lottery business within the prescription of the
National Lottery Act 2005. The plaintiffs can be classified as
licensee under the National Lottery Act and the National Lottery
Regulation 2007.

“Consequently, I resolve this suit against the plaintiffs and
refuse all reliefs sought by the Plaintiffs. I hereby dismiss the
suit of the plaintiffs in its entirety. I make no order as to
cost,” the presiding judge explained.

The plaintiffs had on November 15, 2018 dragged the National
Lottery Regulatory Commission to court, asking the court to
determine certain issues regarding the power of the commission in
regulating sales promotion and others.

In the suit, the plaintiffs sought the determination of 10
questions by the court, one of which was whether the National
Lottery Act of 2005 and the National Lottery Regulation 2007 could
be made in exercise of Federal Legislative powers under the 1999
Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria as amended.

The plaintiffs also wanted the court to determine whether ‘sales
promotion’ to consumers of manufactured goods arising from the
purchase of the 2nd plaintiff’s product otherwise titled “united we
shine, win a trip to Russia” or any such promo come within the
contemplation of the business of the National Lottery” and
consequently subject to the regulatory powers of the National
Lottery Regulatory Commission.

The plaintiffs, thus, sought a declarative judgment that the
National Lottery Act of 2005 and the National Lottery Regulation
2007 could not be made in exercise of Federal Legislative powers
under the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria as
amended.

They, also, sought a declarative judgment that the sales
promotion “to consumers of manufactured goods arising from the
purchase of the 2nd plaintiff’s product otherwise titled “united we
shine, win a trip to Russia or any such promo could not come within
the contemplation of: the business of the National Lottery and
consequently subjected to the regulatory powers of the National
Lottery Regulatory Commission.”

The plaintiffs also wanted the court to award N1 billion “to
Nigeria Breweries against the Attorney General of the Federation
and the National Lottery Regulatory Commission for damage to
business reputation and business standing as well as an award of
another N1 billion to Nigeria Breweries against the Attorney
General of the Federation and the National Lottery Regulatory
Commission for trespass to its premises.”