Defendant contends that the Plaintiff having already obtained judgment in its favour against the Defendant, ought to have sought the execution of the judgment rather than proceeding to this court. The Defendant therefore characterizes the present suit as an abuse of the Court processes seeking to invite this court to serve as an appellate court over decisions of Sierra Leonean Courts. The Defendant says that amounts to an attack on the judicial comity existing between this Court and courts of member states. PLAINTIFF’S ARGUMENT IN RESPONSE The Plaintiff, before responding to the three prongs argument of the Defendant, raised an issue to challenge the propriety of the Defendant’s document titled Affidavit in Support of the Preliminary Objection deposed to by one Osman Ibrahim Kanu, a Principal State Counsel at the Law Officers Department in the office of the Attorney General of the Defendant and sworn to before a Commissioner for Oaths in Freetown on the 24th September, 2018. The Plaintiff’s argument in this regard is that the said Affidavit in Support of the application for preliminary objection is defective and alien to the Rules of this Court since it was not deposed and sworn to before this Honourable Court but under the authority of a different court in Sierra Leone. In response to the Defendant’s argument that the present action has been instituted in breach of Annexure “A” for failing to comply with a condition precedent which provided for arbitration, the Plaintiff stated that via two letters dated 20th December, 2011 and 19th January, 2018 which were duly served on the Attorney General of the Defendant, the Plaintiff requested that an Arbitrator be appointed for the purpose of having the dispute resolved but the Defendant on 12