Facts:

The Appellant is the Plaintiff in suit No: FHC/L/CS/716/2010. The parties originally sued were 5, before it was later reduced to the current Respondents when the names of two of the original defendants were struck out. The Appellant’s case is that her 40 feet container registered as or with No: MSKU826425-8 which was imported into the country containing built-up fans worth N10,000,000 was auctioned by the Respondents to a third party against all known law and practice of the trade especially when she has paid all the custom duties and charges. Confronted with this situation, the Appellant called out the Respondents in the lower court in suit No: FHC/L/CS/716/2010. The Appellant, as Plaintiff made the following claim from the Respondents:

1. A declaration that 40 feet container of fully built ceiling fan with No. MSKU826425-8 imported into the country with bill of lading No. NARV1858249288 and its entire content are the property of the plaintiff, Nigeria Engineering Works Limited.

2. A declaration that the auctioning of the contents of the Plaintiff’s said container by the 1st, 2nd and 3rd Defendants, after paying all the duty charges imposed on it by the 1st and 2nd Defendants is unjust and illegal.

3. A declaration that the release of the container MSKU826425-8 by the 1st, 2nd and 3rd Defendants to a third party other than the Plaintiff herein is unjust illegal and mal fide.

4. N100,000,000.00 (One Hundred Million Naira) against the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd Defendants jointly and severally as general and exemplary damages for loss of profit, good will and hardship suffered by the Plaintiff as a result of their respective actions.

5. N16,206,221.04 (Sixteen Million, Two Hundred and Six Thousand, Two Hundred and Twenty-Two Naira, Four Kobo) only against the 1st, 2nd and 3rd Defendants jointly and severally being special damages.

The 1st and 2nd Respondents did not file any statement of defence but rather filed notice of preliminary objection to the suit on the premise that the Appellant lacked the locus standi to institute the action. The 3rd Respondent filed a defence. The lower court upheld the preliminary objection of the 1st and 2nd Defendants, declaring the suit incompetent and struck out the suit.
The Appellant dissatisfied with the judgment of the trial court appealed to the Court of Appeal.