Facts:

The Respondent through a banking relationship it had with the Appellant, was granted an Import Finance and Overdraft Facilities by the Appellant. Following the overdraft, the Appellant alleged that the Respondent defaulted in the payment of same and that following negotiations, it conceded to the payment of a concessionary sum of N3.5 billion out of an alleged outstanding indebtedness of N3.5 billion, as full and final settlement of the total outstanding indebtedness of the Respondent and its sister companies.

The conceded sum was however not paid despite repeated demands by the Appellant, and this led to the institution of a suit at the Federal High Court (lower court) by the Appellant. The Respondent also filed a suit at the lower court, claiming non-indebtedness to the Appellant. In the Respondents’ suit, the lower court made orders directing the parties to maintain status quo ante bellum, pending the determination of the suit which was filed earlier in time – the Appellants’ suit.

During the subsistence of the order of court for parties to maintain status quo ante bellum, the Respondent issued cheques to third parties from the funds in its account with the Appellant, over which account the Appellant alleged that it had a lien. The Appellant’s refusal to honour these cheques lead to the institution of a fresh suit at the High court of Lagos State (trial Court), by the Respondent. Upon being served with the originating processes in this Suit, the Appellant filed a defence, a memorandum of conditional appearance and a notice of preliminary objection, urging the trial court to dismiss or strike out the suit. The Appellant contended that the Respondent’s claims constituted an abuse of court process and was devoid of any reasonable cause of action. The Respondent filed a counter affidavit, to which the Appellant responded with a further affidavit and a reply on points of law.

The trial court, Coram O.O. Femi-Adeniyi, J., heard arguments on the preliminary objection, and ruled that Respondent’s suit did not constitute an abuse of Court process. The Court went on to adjourn the suit sine die, further stating that the determination of the Notice of Preliminary Objection will be pre-emptive of the decisions of the Supreme Court in the appeals pending between the parties.

Dissatisfied with the Ruling of the trial Court, the Appellant appealed to the Court of Appeal.