A Federal High Court sitting in Lagos has thrown out a hefty N1 billion lawsuit filed against telecommunications giant, MTN Nigeria Communications Plc. The suit, which alleged copyright infringement, was dismissed in its entirety by the court.
Judgment Details and Court's Stance
Justice Ayokunle Olayinka Faji delivered the judgment on January 6, 2026, with a copy obtained by journalists over the weekend. The legal action was initiated by Walls and Gates Ltd and its Managing Director, Mr Okechukwu Udeichi. They had sued MTN over its 20th anniversary promotional campaign.
In a decisive ruling, Justice Faji held that the plaintiffs failed to prove any legally protectable right in their promotional proposal. The judge characterized the suit as frivolous, speculative, and vexatious. Consequently, the court not only dismissed the case but also ordered the plaintiffs to pay N3 million in costs to MTN Nigeria.
The Core of the Plaintiffs' Claim
The dispute, filed under suit number FHC/L/CS/1935/2021, centered on a proposal titled “20 for 20.” The plaintiffs claimed they submitted this idea to MTN on September 17, 2019, ahead of the company's 20th-anniversary celebrations in 2021.
They alleged that MTN's subsequent anniversary promotion, which involved awarding 20 Sport Utility Vehicles (SUVs) to subscribers, was directly derived from their confidential proposal. Based on this, they sought N1 billion in damages or, alternatively, an order for MTN to account for the promotion's revenue and give them 50% of it.
MTN's Defense and the Court's Reasoning
MTN, represented by a legal team led by Obafemi Agaba, vigorously denied all allegations. The company argued that the “20 for 20” document was an unsolicited business idea that created no binding contractual or confidential relationship. MTN maintained its anniversary program was independently developed.
In his analysis, Justice Faji made several key findings:
On Confidentiality: The court found no confidential relationship existed. The judge noted the plaintiffs had already submitted the same proposal to the Nigerian Copyright Commission and used it for a trademark application before sending it to MTN, thereby placing it in the public domain. Furthermore, they admitted circulating it to other organizations.
On Copyright Infringement: Justice Faji emphasized that Nigerian copyright law protects the expression of ideas, not the ideas or business concepts themselves. He ruled that the plaintiffs' proposal for a “20 for 20 Millennium Promotion” was merely a basic concept of rewarding customers during an anniversary. It lacked the originality and intellectual effort required for copyright protection. The judge also clarified that registration with the Copyright Commission does not automatically confer copyright.
The court also noted the plaintiffs themselves conceded they could not prove their claim of trademark infringement, leaving only the other two allegations for determination.
Implications and Conclusion
This judgment reinforces critical legal principles in Nigeria's intellectual property and commercial landscape. It underscores that unsolicited business proposals, without a prior agreement like a Non-Disclosure Agreement (NDA), carry minimal legal protection for the submitter.
The ruling serves as a significant legal victory for MTN Nigeria, closing a long-running dispute that began in 2021. It also acts as a cautionary note for businesses and individuals submitting unsolicited ideas, highlighting the importance of formal agreements to protect confidential concepts before sharing them widely.
