This appeal turns on the interpretation of the meaning of revenue within the context of the jurisdiction conferred on the Federal High Court under the Federal High Court Act, 1973 (now Cap. 134 of the laws of the Federation, 1990). It also raises the issue whether the contributions made and payable under the National Provident Fund Act of 1961 (now Cap. 273 of the Law of the Federation, 1993) can qualify as revenue of the Federal Government of Nigeria.

The appellant was charged in the Judicial Division of the Federal high Court of Nigeria with three counts which read as follows:

THAT YOU, ANSALDO NIGERIA LIMITED of being an employee within the meaning of National provident Fund Act 1961, failed to register all your workers by your provident Fund from NPF 13 cards in respect of each of your worker as required by section 8(1) of the National Provident Fund (General) regulations 1961, and thereby committed an offence punishable under section 35(1)(f) of the National Provident Fund Act 1961.

THAT YOU, ANSALDO NIGERIA LIMITED of No. 170 Awolowo Road, Ikoyi, in the Lagos Judicial Division, being an Employer within the meaning of National provident Fund Act 1961, failed to pay contributions prescribed for workers and Employers, as stipulated in the third schedule to the Act, for the period and October 1983 contrary to section 13(1) of the National Provident Fund Act 1961 and thereby committed an offence punished under section 35(1)(d) of the of the National Provident Fund Act 1961.

THAT YOU, ANSALDO NIGERIA LIMITED of No. 170 Awolowo Road, Ikoyi, in the Lagos Judicial Division, being an Employer within the meaning of National provident Fund Act 1961, failed to pay contributions on behalf of your causal workers contrary to section 13 of the National Provident Fund (General) Regulations 1961 and thereby committed an offence punishable under section 35(1)(f) of the National Provident Fund Act 1961.”

On a motion on notice the Appellant raised an objection to the charge and prayed the Federal High Court to strike out the charge on the ground that the Federal High Court has no jurisdiction "since the charge herein does not relate to criminal proceedings pertaining to the revenue of the Federal Government". The objection was raised before Belgore J. (as he then was). The learned trial Judge overruled the objection.

The appellant appealed to the Court of Appeal against the ruling. In a unanimous decision of the Court of Appeal, the appeal was dismissed.

Dissatisfied with the Court of Appeal, the Appeal the appellant appealed to Supreme Court.