We are pleased to announce the publication of our latest article, Enforcement of No Refund Policy under Nigerian Law.
Authored by our Business Advisory and Foreign Investment team, this article examines the legal framework governing the enforceability of “no refund” policies in Nigeria, with a focus on the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Act 2018 and the Sale of Goods Act 1893.
In this piece, we analyse the extent to which businesses may rely on contractual freedom to restrict refund rights, and the statutory limitations imposed on such practices. The article also considers consumer rights in relation to defective or non-conforming goods and services, relevant judicial authorities, and provides guidance on structuring refund and return policies in compliance with applicable law.
What a no refund policy actually is
A no refund policy is a commercial practice. A business states that payments made for goods or services are non-refundable. In effect, the clause limits or excludes the purchaser’s right to recover the purchase price once the transaction completes.
Since the Federal Competition and Consumer Protection Act 2018 came into force, attention has turned to how far businesses may restrict post-sale remedies. In practice, many retailers display notices stating that goods sold, or services pre-booked, cannot be refunded.
Where contractual freedom meets consumer protection
The enforceability of such policies raises real questions under Nigerian law. Freedom of contract allows parties to agree their own terms. However, consumer protection legislation limits how far that freedom extends.
Our article examines both sides of that tension. It considers the extent to which businesses may rely on contractual freedom to restrict refund rights. It also identifies where the FCCPA 2018 and the Sale of Goods Act 1893 cut across those terms.
What businesses should review
A blanket notice is rarely the end of the analysis. Consequently, businesses should look at how their refund terms operate in practice, not merely how they are worded.
Three questions help. Does the term exclude a remedy the law provides? Is the customer told clearly before purchase? And does the practice differ from the printed policy?
Click the button below to read the publication.
