their action against all the Defendants and herein declare that we determine that this Motion does not amount to an abuse of court process. 8.1.8. Even in the cases AMOUZOU Henri, and El-hadji Tidjani Aboubacar cited above, we observe that the Court has been liberal in allowing Applicants to withdraw or discontinue their cases. Further, our Rules provide for the award of costs of the parties in prosecuting their respective sides of the case, so that they do not incur unnecessary expenses or experience financial losses. For one thing, the withdrawal or discontinuance of a case saves/reserves the time and resources of the court and the parties to engage in other endeavors; further, it lessens the burden and strain on them; most importantly, it speaks to the honor and ethics of the party - 30 withdrawing or discontinuing the case if he knows it is no longer worth the effort, time and exercise to continue in a bad case, or an illegal venture, or a fruitless and frivolous exercise. We therefore follow the tradition of our predecessors to grant an application of the Plaintiffs to withdraw or discontinue their case. See ECW/CCJ/RUL/29/15, delivered December 02, 2015, supra. 8.3. The second and final issue we shall address ourselves to is what constitutes abuse of court process, and does it exist in this instant case? 8.3.1. Abuse of Court process is a term generally applied to a proceeding which is wanting in bona fide, and is frivolous, vexatious and oppressive. Abuse of court process is when a party improperly uses judicial processes to the harassment, annoyance and irritation of his opponent and to interfere with the administration of justice. Saraki vs. Kotoye (1992) 9 NWLR (pt 280) 131; Amaefuna vs State (1988) 2 NWLR (pt 75) 156 at 177. 8.3.2. The 4th and 5th Defendants /Respondents have contended that this suit is an abuse of court process because it is similar in all respects to three prior cases already filed involving the same parties, the same subject matter and the same source and transaction. The cases are: ECW/CCJ/APP/06/12 between Vincent Agu and 19 others vs. Federal republic of Nigeria, ministry of Defense, R.S.B. Holdings Nigeria Ltd., Deminers Concept Nigeria Ltd., and the Attorney General of the Federation; FHC/OW/CS/93/2014 between Dr. Ignatius Nnanna Onyenekwu and Mrs. Chinyere Onyegekwu vs. R.S.B. Holdings Nigeria Ltd., Deminers Concept Nigeria Ltd., Dr. Emeka Uhegbu, Attorney General of the Federation, and Minister of Defense.