The respondent filed an action against the appellant at the High Court of Enugu State claiming a declaration that the appellant was negligent in the handling of a business relationship between the respondent and the Norwegian Tale of Norway; a declaration that the failure of the appellant to transmit the sum of N165, 317.36 meant for the Norwegian Tale is a breach of contractual relationship between the respondent and the appellant and an offer directing the appellant to refund to the respondent the said sum. The respondent also claimed N16, 500.00 as special and general damages.

The respondent filed an application for judgment to be entered when the appellant failed to file its statement of defence at the expiration of time allowed. The appellant then filed a motion under the interest power of the court for an order dismissing the respondent’s action on the grounds that it was statute barred and an abuse of court process. Both motions were consolidated with the appellant filing another motion for extension of time was granted and the consolidated motions were struck out at the instance of counsel for the respondent.

In the statement of defence, the appellant raised the point again that the respondent’s action was incompetent because it was vexatious, statute-barred and an abuse of court process. It also sought to raise the point by way of preliminary objection. To this the respondent responded by filing another motion of judgment. Consolidation of the motion for dismissal. The appellant moved the motion. When the respondent argued in reply to the motion, neither the appellant nor its counsel was present in court. The respondent’s counsel then proceeded to argue the respondent’s motion for judgment, made extensive amendments to the respondent’s reply to the appellant’s statement of defence and examined witnesses.

The court subsequently entered judgment for the respondent in the sum of N10,748,080 as special and general damages. It also ordered the appellant to refund to the respondent the sum of N165, 317.36.

Dissatisfied, the appellant appealed to the Court of Appeal.