Facts:

The Respondents took out a Writ of Summons, claiming declaratory and injunctive reliefs against the Appellant and the Assets Management Corporation of Nigeria (AMCON). The Appellant was the banker of the Respondents and in the course of their banker/customer relationship, it granted several loan facilities to the Respondents over many years, which were secured by the Respondents’ landed property located at Port Harcourt, Rivers State. The Respondents claimed that they have been repaying the facilities to the Appellant as at when due and indeed they fully repaid the Appellant all the facilities, even in excess. They alleged that they no longer owed the Appellant any sum from the loan facilities, rather it was the Appellant that owed them large sums of money representing spurious and illegal bank charges which arose as a result of the Appellant’s habit of charging them interest rate on the facilities that was over and above rates agreed upon by the parties and above the Central Bank of Nigeria (CBN) interest rate.

AMCON, as the 2nd Defendant in the suit filed its statement of defence denying the claim of the Respondents. It asserted that it was not part of the credit facilities agreement or any lending agreement between the Appellant and the Respondents. It also raised objection to the jurisdiction of the trial Court to hear the Respondents’ case against it as a Federal Government Corporation. However, before trial commenced, the Respondents filed a notice of discontinuance of the suit against AMCON leaving the Appellant as the only defendant in the suit.

The Appellant then filed its statement of defence by which it denied the claims of the Respondents and asserted inter alia that it has sold the Respondents’ debt to AMCON on the 31st December, 2010 and thereafter it had nothing to do with the said debts. The Appellant proceeded to file a motion on notice by which it prayed the trial Court to strike out the Respondents’ suit on the ground that the 2nd Defendant (AMCON) is an agency of the Federal Government of Nigeria and was sued in respect of its administrative and management functions.

After consideration of the arguments of counsel on both sides, the trial Court held that the claims before the Court falls squarely within the jurisdiction of the State High Court. The Court also refused to set aside its decision striking out AMCON as a defendant to the suit, having become functus officio.

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