Facts:

The Appellant entered into a banking relationship with the Respondent wherein the Respondent undertook to offer the Appellant Export Finance Facilities if the Appellant secures an Export Trade contract which must be backed by an acceptable and confirmed letters of credit from a foreign entity/company. Consequently, relying on the aforementioned agreement, the Appellant engaged the services of Eglone Group Asia Pte Ltd to broker foreign contracts for the supply of solid minerals wherein it was agreed that Eglone Group Asia Pte Ltd would be paid 4 (sic) commission by the Appellant as brokerage fees for each contract secured for the Appellant and in the event of a default in performance, the Plaintiff would pay 2% of the value of each contract as default fees. Following this Agreement, Eglone Group Asia Pte Ltd secured two foreign contracts with Chinese fi rms for the export of Tin Ore, Tantalite Ore and Columbite Ore from Nigeria to China by the Appellant. Thereafter, the Appellant caused Eglone Group Asia Pte Ltd to obtain draft copies of Letters of Credit from the Chinese companies’ bankers-Industrial and Commerce Bank of China (ICBC) and presented same to the Respondent for confirmation/amendment if any. However, the Respondent refused to confirm the letter of credit, despite having earlier negotiated and agreed on the details with ICBC before it was issued. Consequently, the contract between the Appellant and the Chinese companies were cancelled. Sequel to the cancellation of the contract, the Appellant became liable to pay penalty fee to Eglone Group Asia Pte Ltd for the breach occasioned by the Respondent.
According to the Appellant, the cancellation of the contracts was because the Respondent failed/neglected to confirm the letters of credit issued by the buyer’s bank Industrial and Commerce Bank of China (lCBC). Miff ed by the cancellation of the contracts, the Appellant instituted an action before the High Court of the Federal Capital Territory. In a judgment delivered on the 5th day of July, 2018, the trial Court found that, the Respondent Bank was not negligent and therefore, not liable in damages to the Appellant. The suit was therefore dismissed.

Aggrieved by the decision, the Appellant filed an appeal against the decision via notice of appeal dated the 2nd day of September, 2018, but filed on the 2nd day of October, 2018 containing seven (7) grounds of appeal. The lower Court allowed the appeal and found that the Respondent was negligent and ordered the refund of the penalty fees paid on behalf of the Appellant in the sum of $4,486.04 (Four Thousand, Four Hundred and Eighty-Six United States Dollars, Four Cents).

Still dissatisfied with the judgment of the lower Court, particularly in relation to award of monetary damages, the Appellant further appealed to the Supreme Court.