By Oluwakemi Kindness
The Federal High Court, Abuja has affirmed the powers of the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Commission (FCCPC) to investigate complaints of medical negligence, in a ruling seen as strengthening accountability in Nigeria’s healthcare sector.
Justice Emeka Nwite delivered the judgment on April 15, 2026, in a suit filed by Life Bridge Medical Diagnostic Centre Ltd, which challenged the Commission’s authority to probe complaints involving healthcare services.
Reacting to the judgment in a statement on Tuesday, FCCPC Executive Vice Chairman, Tunji Bello, describes it as an affirmation that consumers are entitled to protection and redress across all sectors, including healthcare.
He stated that the ruling confirms that consumer protection and professional regulation are distinct functions that can operate simultaneously in the public interest, adding that the Commission remains committed to engaging stakeholders to promote accountability and quality service delivery.
The plaintiff had argued that the FCCPC lacked jurisdiction to investigate alleged medical negligence without first establishing a concurrent arrangement with the Medical and Dental Council of Nigeria (MDCN).
However, the court rejected the claims, holding that the company, as a commercial entity providing diagnostic services for payment, falls within the scope of the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Act (FCCPA) 2018.
The court ruled that healthcare services are subject to consumer protection oversight and that complaints relating to consumer satisfaction fall within the FCCPC’s mandate, even where the sector is also professionally regulated.
Justice Nwite drew a distinction between professional discipline, which remains the responsibility of relevant regulatory bodies, and consumer protection, which covers service quality, fairness, and treatment of patients.
He also held that provisions requiring coordination among regulators do not limit the Commission’s powers, noting that the absence of a formal agreement does not invalidate FCCPC’s authority to act.
The court further ruled that ethical obligations such as patient confidentiality do not override lawful investigative powers exercised in the public interest and in accordance with due process.
