The Federal High Court, Abuja, is currently adjudicating a corporate dispute between the Corporate Affairs Commission (CAC) and Chappal Energies Nigeria Limited over the Commission’s directive compelling the company to change its business name on allegations that it could “deceive the unsuspecting public.”
The suit, instituted in 2024, was filed by Chappal Energies through its counsel, Oluseun Awonuga, SAN, who contends that the CAC’s directive breached his client’s constitutional right to fair hearing. The plaintiff seeks a reversal of the directive, arguing that the Commission acted outside the scope of its powers.
In Suit No. CV/4502/25, Chappal Energies alleges that the CAC had duly approved its incorporation under the Companies and Allied Matters Act (CAMA) after a public search confirmed no conflicting entity existed. The company was issued a Certificate of Incorporation on January 15, 2024, and commenced operations in the oil and gas sector.
The dispute arose following a petition by Chappal Petroleum Development Company Limited (CPDC) to the CAC’s Administrative Proceedings Committee, alleging similarity of names. Acting on the petition, the CAC directed Chappal Energies to change its name, citing potential deception.
Awonuga, SAN, maintains that his client was denied fair hearing before the directive was issued. He further argued that the CAC has historically registered multiple companies with similar names where no deception was likely, and that the directive would negatively impact Chappal Energies’ business operations.
In its defence, the CAC insists it acted within its statutory mandate. The Commission claims that former CPDC directors deliberately incorporated Chappal Energies to mislead the public, and that notices sent to the company were ignored. It urged the court to dismiss the suit, stressing that the same law empowering it to register companies also authorizes it to compel a name change when necessary.
On December 4, 2025, the CAC opened its defence by presenting Mr. Yusuf Hamza, who adopted his Witness Statement on Oath dated October 10, 2024. Justice Mohammed Umar admitted into evidence the Commission’s Letter dated March 27, 2024, and the Certificate of Incorporation as defence exhibits.
During cross‑examination, the plaintiff’s counsel pressed the witness on whether such complaints required both parties to be heard. Hamza responded that only the committee could form an opinion, not a single official.
The defence counsel, S. U. Madaki, Esq., thereafter applied for a subpoena to compel CPDC officials to produce their petition letter dated March 14, 2024. The court directed the registrar to issue the summons and adjourned the matter to February 23, 2026, for continuation of defence.