Facts:

This is an appeal against the ruling of the Federal High Court which struck out the appellant’s claim on the grounds that the General Claim Form used to commence the action, was not signed and that it was uncertain who signed the statement of claim.

The appellant through its counsel filed a debt recovery action against the respondents using the General Claim Form and statement of claim as provided under the AMCON Proceedings Rules 2013. The respondents objected to the competency of the suit on the grounds that the originating process was not dated and signed as well as uncertainty on who signed the statement of claim. In response the appellant maintained that it was an irregularity that can be cured. However, in its ruling on the issue raised, the lower court struck out the suit.

Dissatisfied with the ruling of the lower court, the appellant appealed to the Court of Appeal.