This appeal arose as a result of arbitration proceedings. Briefly the facts giving rise to this appeal are these. The Appellant entered into an Agreement with the 1st Respondent on 23/12/92, which made provision for reference to arbitration in the event of any dispute arising between the parties thereto which dispute could not be mutually settled. A dispute actually arose between the parties and reference was then made to an arbitrator appointed by and agreed to by both parties. The 2nd Respondent herein was the arbitrator jointly appointed by the parties and all references were submitted and made to him in accordance with clause 2 of the said Agreement.

In the course of the arbitral proceedings, the learned counsel for the Appellant objected to the continuation of the proceedings on the grounds that:-

The learned arbitrator, the 2nd Respondent herein, after hearing the submissions of learned counsel for the parties to the arbitration, overruled the objections of the learned Appellant's counsel but in respect of objection (i) he ruled that;

"There is therefore only one company that is the Claimant i.e. Lutin Investment Limited. If in the course of the hearing of witnesses the Respondent (now Appellant) succeeds in showing that there are two separate companies involved then the normal consequences will follow".

In respect of objection (ii) the learned arbitrator also ruled that since the parties did not specifically agree on where the arbitration is to be held, in their Agreement, the law gives him full powers to decide the locale of the arbitration.

The Appellant was dissatisfied with this ruling and consequently filed a civil summons against the Respondents in the Federal High Court, Lagos seeking a declaration that the 2nd Respondent was no longer considered reasonable, fair, impartial, suitable and qualified to continue with the arbitration proceedings. They also sought an order to remove the Arbitrator from office.

The learned trial Judge dismissed all the claims of the Appellant and the Appellant appealed to the Court of Appeal which, also dismissed it. The Appellant further appealed to the Supreme Court.