The Appellant had instituted an action against the West African Marine Products Ltd. the 2nd Respondent at the Lagos High Court for the recovery of a sum of N101,598,144.08 or realize the security which constituted of assorted frozen fish imported with an overdraft facility granted by the Appellant's Bank. The fish was stored in the cold room belonging to the Defendant/2nd Respondent. On the 31 July, 1998, the Lagos High Court granted leave to the Appellant sequel to its exparte application, to take possession of, remove and sell the entire stock of fish stored in the room of the 2nd Respondent, It further made orders restraining the 2nd Respondent, its agents and others from disturbing or preventing the Appellant from taking possession and disposing of the entire stock and in any way from interfering or intermeddling with the Appellant's possession or sale of the entire frozen fish.

However on the 10th August, 1998 after the order above was made, the 1st Respondent in this appeal filed an action in the Federal High Court which incidentally gave rise to this present appeal against the Appellant in this case in respect of the same fish for which an earlier order had been obtained in the Lagos High Court, Interestingly on the 19th August, 1998, the 1st Respondent applied for a motion to restrain the Appellant, West African Marine Products Ltd. and Triana Ltd. who happen to be the Defendants in the suit FH/C/L/CS/869/98 from tampering, disposing or further selling the total quantity offish of assorted kinds in 86000 cartons presently stored at cold room/warehouse of Arsa Fish Foods (Nigeria Ltd.), an order directing the Deputy Sheriff to secure the carton of the fish which is the subject matter of the suit, and an injunctive order restraining the Defendants by themselves and their agents and privies from disturbing, harassing intimidating and interfering with the duties of the Receiver/Manager.

The Federal High Court did not make an order granting interlocutory injunction, but made an order restraining the Defendants by themselves, their servants, agent and/or privies howsoever called from disturbing, harassing, intimidating, or in any other manner whatsoever interfering with the performance of the duties of the Receiver/Manager of the 2nd Defendant pending the hearing and determination of the Motion on Notice.

Dissatisfied, Appellant appealed to the Court of Appeal which dismissed the appeal.

Dissatisfied still, the Appellant appealed to the Supreme Court.