Iuze Mukube
Puma Energy Namibia has approached the court seeking an order to urgently restore its access and control over key fuel and operational areas at Eros Airport and Ondangwa Airport.
This access, the company claims, was unlawfully deprived of by the Namibia Airports Company (NAC) on 11 March 2026.
In the court documents, Puma argues that while it was enjoying peaceful and undisturbed possession of its aircraft fuelling business, which it conducts at its fuel facilities at both the Eros and Ondangwa Airports, NAC brazenly engaged in vigilantism.
Puma contends NAC spoliated it, in other words, unlawfully deprived the company of possession of or access to premises or property without following proper legal procedures.
Before the spoliation, the company possessed at the Eros Airport its depot and bulk storage facility, the roadway from the depot to the apron and portions of the apron.
At Ondangwa Airport, it possessed the Jet Tank and Avgas Tank, a portion of the apron adjacent to these tanks, the office and the walkway and roadway from the office to the tanks and the terminal.
However, on 11 March, Puma was unlawfully dispossessed by the respondents, which include NAC, Central Oil Namibia, the Inspector-General of the Namibia Police, Commissioner Naftal Lungameni Sakaria of the Oshana region, and Namibia Protection Services, the oil giant contends further.
Puma furthermore claims the respondents acted together, with common purpose.
At the Eros Airport, the respondents have allegedly dispossessed Puma of the roadway and apron.
Additionally, the respondents have also dispossessed the applicant of its office, fuel tanks, the roadway to and from the fuel tanks and the apron, as well as the portion of the apron directly adjacent to the fuel tanks where aircraft fuelling takes place at the Ondangwa Airport.
Relying on the mandament van spolie principle, the company is arguing that it was unlawfully disposed of and should be restored to its previous position without the court first deciding on ownership or contractual rights.
NAC opposed the application in the Windhoek High Court on Monday.
The company, through lawyer Sisa Namandje, argued that the matter did not warrant urgent intervention.
NAC argued that Puma could not assume consent or entitlement merely because the company did not act immediately.
NAC argued that Puma Energy was alerted to relevant deadlines and prior notices regarding its status as a fuel supplier.
Puma was informed of its position in a notice dated 12 January 2026 that Central Oil Namibia will commence with the provision of the services with effect from 13 February 2026, said Namandje.
On the operational front, NAC rejected claims that Puma Energy is uniquely positioned to provide the service, noting that competitors such as Central Oil Namibia have adequate storage and logistical arrangements in place.
It argued that the provision of refuelling services at the airports form part of a regulated procurement process conducted in terms of the Public Procurement Act.
Therefore, if the court were to find in favour of Puma, the airport company would be compelled to act inconsistently with the law.
It stated that the company, acting by statutory procurement process, allocated the conduct of the contested operations to another provider.