The case itself was filed in the High Court of Lagos State on 15th October, 1960 and after all the preliminaries which included filing and settling of pleadings and substitution of parties for those that died during the pendency of the case, hearing was fixed before Kester, J. (as he then was) for 18th November, 1964. Kes¬ter, J. took some evidence in the case.

After this, the pleadings were amended and again hearing was adjourned till 10th June 1966. But the case did not come up until 8th March 1968 when it was mentioned de novo before Beckley, J. who was the Judge who eventually tried the case. From March 1966 until 1st March 1972, the case dragged on, beset with one application or another. However, on that day, that is 1st March 1972, hearing commenced before Beckley, J. By 3rd March, the 1st plaintiff's witness had concluded his evidence and further hearing was adjourned till 16th May at the instance of the court. Further evidence was taken and by consent, the case was adjourned till 14th June 1972. After 14th June 1972, the next adjourned date for mention was on 16th October 1972 and the adjournment was at the instance of the learned counsel for the defendants.

These defendants are the appellants in this court. Further hearing did not con¬tinue until 12th February 1974 and adjournments up till that time had been mostly at the instance of parties and or their counsel who also came up with various ap¬plications. The defence which opened on 12th February 1974 was concluded on 3rd July 1974 and the court took the addresses of learned counsel from 12th July 1974 to 18th July 1974 when the learned trial Judge adjourned judgment sine die.

Now, on 3rd October, 1975, fifteen months after the close of the case (and which was also three years and seven months after the court, [Beckley, J.] took the first evidence in the case), the learned trial Judge delivered his judgment. He dismissed the plaintiffs' claim.

In the Federal Court of Appeal, one of the main complaints by the plaintiffs, who were the appellants in that court, was that the learned trial Judge took a long time after the conclusion of the case before he delivered judgment and by this rea¬son, he was not in a position to appreciate the issues involved in the case in a proper focus or remember his own impressions of the witnesses. The gravity of this complaint would be more evident when it is realised that in all, up to twenty witnesses gave evidence before the learned trial Judge. In the Judgment of the Federal Court of Appeal, delivered by Coker, J.C.A. the Court held that there was inordinate delay and gave judgment in favour of the plaintiffs on the printed evidence before the court.

The Defendants appealed to the Supreme Court.