SOUTH East Investment Company Limited(claimant), a  Lagos based  construction and mechanical works fir,m has filed a motion ex-parte before a Lagos  High Court Igbosere, seeking an order of interim  injunction  to restrain Intercontinental Bank Plc(defendant), its heirs, agents, servants, attorneys or privies from re-awarding the contract in respect of the construction  of one storey office building at Alaka until the hearing and determination of the motion on notice and the substantive suit.
The construction and mechanical firm stated in its statement of claim on suit No LD/1614/2010  before Justice Doris Okuwobi that on the request of the bank, it commenced construction work to erect one storey as branch office at a plot of land at Alaka, known as No 7 Western Avenue, Surulere, Lagos.
It was the claimant’s case that the bank paid 50 per cent mobilization fees adding that  as the work progressed, the defendant paid more fees which has reached 80 per cent of the agreed contract sum. It was stated that as work was going on at the site, agents of the Lagos State government came and sealed up the premises on  an alleged contravention and failure of the bank to obtain the required notice from the Urban Development Board, thereby stopping work at the site.
According to the claimant, the site was reopened in July 2010 after the intervention of the bank, adding that it mobilized back to the site to continue the project which was 80 per cent completed. It was said that what was left to be completed were the gate house, filling of the entire structure and installation of bank safe and security door which were expected to be provided by independent contractor appointed by the defendant.
The firm averred that after mobilization tom the site, it made several demands from the defendant’s services department for the provision of its specialized and customized architectural drawing of the gate house  and tiles normally used in the bank’s office  buildings, but the officer in charge refused  to provide the required information on how to get the items. It was stated that rather than providing the demanded items for the completion of the work, the  claimant received with great shock, a letter from the bank stating that the contract between the two parties has been determined, stressing that the reasons adduced by the defendant were unfounded and untruthful.
It was the claimant’s submission that all efforts made to explain to the bank that the company was fully committed to complete the work was not appreciated as the bank refused to respond but instead, invaded the project site on August 2, 2010 with security men and thugs, drove away the claimant’s workers on site and forcefully put up its own private security guards and armed policemen. The claimant posited that the action of Intercontinental bank prevented workers  of the company from going on with the project.
Besides, the project which was 80 per cent completed had been stalled in the past by various actions of the bank and in their failure to secure the requisite approval from the Urban Development Agency of the Lagos State government, coupled with its latest action by unilaterally revoking and re-awarding the contract to a third party without due process and in breach of the contract between the parties.
The claimant contends that bank through one Mr Aniakan Abasi Benson, its officer, acted with malice and extreme bad faith because it(claimant) had sued  and recovered the sum of N7,047,520 on terms of settlement in respect of a previous suit. It further contends that the termination of the contract without warning and or notice of intention to terminate the said contract is a flagrant breach of the terms of contract, stating  that the action of the bank has caused the claimant loss in machinery and equipment, loss of  man-hour and serious economic loss.
Consequently, South East Investment Company Limited prayed for a declaration that the unilateral determination of the contract for the construction of bank office of the defendant bank without just cause and in breach of the penalty clauses is illegal, null and void and in breach of the contract validly entered into on July 28, 2008 by the parties. Furthermore, the claimant prayed for an order directing the defendant to withdraw the security guards forcefully put in the premises and reinstate its workers and security personnel back to the construction site of the said premises in Surulere.  Moreover, the claimant is claiming the sum of N10 million damages against the bank for breach of contract.
But in its statement of defence and counter-claim, Intercontinental Bank urged the court to dismiss the claimant’s claim, saying that it is vexatious, scandalous and frivolous. The  bank stated that it had been complaining about inconsistency of work of the claimant on the project site before  the closure by the Lagos Physical Planning and Development Authority, adding that it complained about the quality of work done  by the construction company at the meeting held on March 10, 2009.
It was submitted that after the reopening of the site by Lagos State government, the claimant was advised  to commence full site activities but it neglected the advice. Furthermore, in order to encourage the claimant to move back to the site and improve on the project, a meeting was held with representative of the claimant and others in attendance. The defendant averred that the despite the meeting and the fact that 80 per cent of the mobilization fee has been disbursed to the claimant, it failed to met up with the terms of the project and therefore, by a letter dated July 5, 2010, the bank repudiated the contractual terms in line with letter of award.
It denied the claimant’s claim that 80 per cent work has been completed at the site, submitting that before the issue of town planning came up, the gate house, filling of the entire structure and the installation of bank safe and security door were already in place. The bank debunked the claim of the claimant that  Aniakan Abasi Benson on behalf of the bank, acted in bad faith against it, positing that apart from the unilateral decision of the bank to repudiate the contract, the claimant had by conduct, terminated the contract by breach of the fundamental and essential terms of the letter of award, maintain that adequate warning and notice were given to the claimant.
In its counter-claim, the bank counter claims the sum of N10 million as general damages against the claimant for the money paid for which the work was not completed. An order of specific performance by compelling the claimant  to pay total cost of the contract sum less the 50 per cent of the cost of work done on the project site and a declaration that the determination of the contract for the construction of bank office at No 7 western Avenue, Surulere is  legal and valid in law and facts. The case has been adjourned by the trial judge till February 3, 2011 for further direction.