Facts:

The Appellants (the Plaintiffs at trial Court) had, in 1982, applied to and obtained from the Federal Ministry of Finance priority and concessional category A approvals for the remittance of Foreign Exchange to their (Appellants’) foreign principals, Bakaert International Trade, Belgium Europe. The Respondent (hereinafter called “UBN”) was aware of these approvals. In furtherance of the approvals, the Appellants issued cheques to UBN to enable the latter make the Foreign Exchange remittances as approved. The Appellant alleged that for the 1st approval, the Defendant issued instantly the draft of £4,534.50 to the Plaintiff. For the instalment of the 2nd approval, it was alleged that the Defendant erroneously and negligently deposed that it would send it through the Central Bank of Nigeria as a mail transfer i.e MT 072619 knowing fully well that she, the Defendant, was incompetent, do so and deceitfully and fraudulently claimed that the approved mode remittance was by mail transfer. On the 20/1/83 the Plaintiffs issued the Defendant another UBA cheque No. 361782/227304 of N10,026.00 to cover the remittance of the 2nd and the last instalment of the 2nd approval valued at £9,063.00. The Appellants’ overseas principal did not receive the total of £13,603.50. The Appellants were aggrieved that UBN did not make the Foreign Exchange remittances as mutually agreed between them. In instituting this suit at the High Court (trial Court) the Appellants’ complain that UBN was negligent and lackadaisical in carrying out their instructions to make Foreign Exchange remittances to their foreign principals. They allege that in consequence of UBN’s negligence, the 1st Appellant lost the sole agency of the Belgium principal – Bakaert International Trade.

Upon conclusion of trial, the trial Court in its judgment non-suited the plaintiffs in respect of their claims, except for the relief on the loss of the sole agency, for which it awarded ₦500,000.00. The Respondent being dissatisfied with the decision of the trial Court, except the order striking out the 2nd plaintiff, filed an appeal at the Court of Appeal (lower Court). The Appellants were also dissatisfied with the part of the judgment non-suiting them and consequently filed a notice of cross-appeal. In a considered judgment, the lower Court dismissed the appeal and allowed the cross-appeal. The appellants’ award of ₦500,000.00 was set aside, while the other claims of the Appellants succeeded.

Further dissatisfied by the decision of the lower Court, the Appellants appealed before the Supreme Court.