The respondent was the plaintiff at the Federal High Court, Lagos. There, it instituted an action against the appellant for recovery of the sum of US$ 31,695.00 (thirty one thousand six hundred and ninety-five US dollars) being unpaid 3% statutory levy being payable by the defendant/appellant to the respondent in respect of the appellant’s vessels that berthed at various Nigerian sea ports between 1992 and 1995. On 30/6/97 the parties were ordered to file their pleadings. Thereupon, the plaintiff/respondent filed its statement of claim to demur pursuant to the provisions of Order 27 of the Federal High Court (Civil Procedure Rules) and consequently filed a motion on notice dated 20/10/97 praying the lower court to dismiss the action on the under – mentioned grounds.

The facts of this case, as can be gleaned from the pleadings of the parties are as follows: The respondent is one of the appellant's trade partners. Their business relationship started sometime in 2005 and over the years has been governed by various agreements entered into between them. In particular, in January 2011 the appellant issued fresh terms of agreement and it was specifically stated that the 2011 agreement supersedes previous agreements. The 2011 agreement was identified as No. 381730 (Exhibit A). It was a term of the agreement that the Claimant/Respondent had the right to terminate the agreement upon giving the Defendant/Appellant 3 months' notice in writing, while the defendant/appellant had the right to terminate the agreement upon giving the claimant/respondent 60 days written notice.

The agreement had some annexures, which, according to the respondent provided for the rights and duties of the parties.

It was the contention of the claimant/respondent that despite trading and carrying on business with the defendant/appellant in accordance with Exhibit A, the appellant purportedly terminated the agreement vide a letter dated 18th March 2011 (Exhibit B). It contended that the letter was not in compliance with the terms of Exhibit A and was in fact addressed to a different company, to wit: Corporate Communication Ltd. The claimant/respondent protested by writing a letter dated 29th March 2011. The claimant/respondent pleaded that on 4th April 2011, it placed orders for the appellant's products, which were rejected on account of the termination letter.

Despite its solicitor's letter challenging the termination of the agreement and requesting an amicable settlement, the appellant withdrew 27 SIM registration kits assigned to the respondent. The respondent pleaded that in compliance with previous Trade Partner Agreements between the parties, it had incurred expenses in procuring facilities and equipment which were of no more use to it, in view of the purported termination of Exhibit A. The claimant/respondent pleaded that the abrupt cancellation of orders without a formal and valid termination of their agreement has caused it huge financial loss.

By its writ of summons and statement of claim dated 12th May, 2011, the respondent sought the following reliefs against the appellant: