The Plaintiff at the High Court of Justice of the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja (the trial Court) and who is the Appellant herein, is a limited liability Company carrying on Construction business throughout the Federal Republic of Nigeria. The 1st and 2nd Defendants and now Respondents in this appeal are the Honourable Minister of the Federal Capital Territory (F.C.T.), Abuja and the Federal Capital Development Authority (F.C.D.A), a statutory body charged with the responsibility of physical development of the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja. The 3rd Defendant/Respondent is another limited liability Company carrying on business in the Federal Capital Territory.

The Plaintiff averred in its statement of claim that she was invited along with other contractors on the 10th of September, 1996, by the 2nd Defendant to submit tenders for the rehabilitation of Keffi road at Karmo junction and Airport Express way. The Plaintiff further averred that of all the six companies that tendered for the contract, that of the Plaintiff was found to be the lowest and most attractive.

On the 3rd of June, 1997, the Plaintiff was awarded the contract at the cost of N94,623,797.84.

A formal agreement was executed between the Plaintiff and the 2nd Defendant on the 30th day of July, 1997. The Plaintiff averred that by virtue of clause 6.00 of the formal agreement, she was expected to mobilize its resources and commence work within two weeks of signing the agreement. The 2nd Defendant was required by the contract to furnish the Plaintiff with full priced copy of the Bills of Quantity, the drawings and specifications. The drawings as afore stated were not given to the Plaintiff and without the drawings the Plaintiff could not mobilize and commence work on the site. The Plaintiff claimed further that even after signing the contract the demand for the afore said drawings was in vain. The duration of the work was for 6 months from the date of signing the contract. Before the expiration of the two weeks period allowed for mobilization, there were moves to terminate the contract. And by a letter dated 29th of August, 1997, the contract of the Plaintiff was terminated by the Defendants. The Plaintiff averred that despite the non-provision of the necessary drawings, it mobilized on site after signing the agreement. A site inspection was carried out by an independent Engineer mandated to inspect the said contract. He produced a report on 3rd of September, 1997. The Plaintiff averred further that as at the date of termination of the contract, it had expended about 11 Million Naira for hiring machinery on site, vehicles, procurement of materials including bitumen, payment of workers' salaries, allowances, procurement of letter of bond from N.I.M.B, Ltd. According to the Plaintiff, immediately the contract was purportedly terminated, the 3rd Defendant moved all machinery and men into the area Plaintiff had already worked upon thereby-committing trespass on the site.

After full hearing, the learned trial Judge entered judgment in favour of the Plaintiff by holding that the termination of contract by the Defendants was wrongfully done. He awarded to the Plaintiff the sum of N14,193,569.68. Dissatisfied, the Defendants appealed to the Court below. After hearing the appeal, the Court below allowed the appeal and set aside the judgment of the trial Court. It also dismissed the cross-appeal.