The Appellant filed a Statement of Defence and filed a motion seeking an order setting down for hearing the points of law raised in the Statement of Defence.

The parties filed and exchanged written addresses in respect of the points of law, which were accordingly set down for hearing.

The learned trial Judge held that since there is no provision for pre-action notice in the contract between the Plaintiff/Respondent and the Defendant/Applicant, the court will assume jurisdiction over the matter.

The Appellant was dissatisfied with the decision and appealed to the lower court, which appeal was dismissed.

The Appellant is still dissatisfied and has further appealed to this court.

The Respondent raised a preliminary objection to the hearing of the appeal contending that the appeal being interlocutory was filed outside the period prescribed by Section 27(2) of the Supreme Court Act, Cap 515 LFN 2004 and no application for extension of time to seek leave appeal was made, that grounds 1, 2 and 3 of the notice of appeal involve questions of mixed law and fact, for which leave ought to have been sought and obtained and that issues A and C formulated in the Appellants brief are distilled from incompetent grounds and therefore incompetent.