A Federal High Court in Abuja has ordered the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (FCCPC) to enforce sanctions against Coscharis Motors over a dispute involving a reportedly defective Range Rover Sport sold to a customer, Florence Ozor.
Justice Emeka Nwite gave the order on Wednesday while ruling on a motion for judicial review filed by Ozor.
The FCCPC was listed as the respondent in the suit.
According to court documents, Ozor purchased a 2024 Range Rover Sport worth N260 million from Coscharis Motors in September 2024 and began using the vehicle in November of the same year.
About six months later, the vehicle reportedly developed recurring faults, including a defective right taillight.
The customer alleged that despite multiple repair efforts, the defects persisted.
She subsequently filed a complaint before the FCCPC, accusing the dealership of supplying a defective vehicle in violation of the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Act (FCCPA) 2018.
On July 16, 2025, the FCCPC wrote to Coscharis Motors requesting a detailed report on the issue and remedial steps taken.
The commission later convened a mediation meeting on August 15, 2025, attended by both parties.
At the mediation, Coscharis Motors reportedly proposed three settlement options: Return of the repaired vehicle with an additional one-year warranty; replacement with another vehicle of the same model, with the cost difference shared among the buyer, dealer, and manufacturer and refund of the purchase price
However, Ozor rejected the refund option and insisted that any replacement vehicle should come at no additional cost.
After reviewing the complaint and submissions from both parties, the FCCPC held that Coscharis Motors supplied defective goods and was obligated to provide an appropriate remedy under relevant provisions of the FCCPA 2018.
The commission subsequently ordered the dealership to provide the customer with a new 2024 Range Rover Sport at no additional cost for a two-month trial period.
It further directed that if similar defects reoccurred during the trial period, the dealership must refund the current market value of a 2024 Range Rover Sport, taking into account any previous discount applied at purchase.
Alternatively, the FCCPC said the dealer could provide a 2025 Range Rover Sport if the customer agreed to pay the difference between both models.
The compliance notice, signed by Nsitem Chizenum, FCCPC’s head of legal services, directed the company to comply within 14 business days.
According to court filings, Coscharis Motors failed to comply with the FCCPC’s directives after the expiration of the compliance deadline.
The applicant alleged that instead of obeying the order, the dealership approached the FCCPC privately and initiated further discussions without her knowledge.
The commission later invited Ozor to additional meetings where the same settlement options she had previously rejected were reportedly reintroduced.
The vehicle involved in the dispute has remained with the dealership since the FCCPC investigation began.
Dissatisfied with the situation, Ozor approached the court seeking an order compelling the FCCPC to enforce its September 2025 directives.
During proceedings, counsel to the FCCPC urged the court to dismiss the application, arguing that the suit was “premature and an abuse of court process”.
However, Justice Nwite ruled that the commission failed to enforce its own binding orders despite the dealership’s non-compliance.
The judge granted an order of mandamus directing the FCCPC to enforce its September 18, 2025 compliance notice within the framework of its statutory powers under the FCCPA 2018.
“A declaration is hereby made that the Respondent, as a government agency, is bound by its orders as much as the parties involved are bound by same and the Respondent’s compliance notice remains in force until set aside by a court or the Respondent issues a compliance certificate affirming compliance pursuant to Section 150(3) FCCPA 2018,” the judge ruled.
“An order of this court is hereby made mandating the Respondent, the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission by way of mandamus, to enforce/comply with the stipulations of its binding order issued on the 18th of September 2025.”
Justice Nwite further directed the FCCPC to invoke its enforcement powers under Section 150(4) of the FCCPA, including shutting down the dealer’s premises or imposing administrative sanctions until compliance is achieved.
