CORAM

---

SOWEMIMO, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT

IDIGBE, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT

ANIAGOLU, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT

---

PARTIES

---

BEN IKPANG & ORS

APPELLANTS 

---

CHIEF SAM EDOHO & ANOR

RESPONDENTS 

---

AREA(S) OF LAW

---

PROPERT LAW- PROCEDURAL LAW- RES JUDICATA

 

---

SUMMARY OF FACTS

There was a dispute between the Plaintiff and the Defendant with each side staking a claim to the ownership of the land through inheritance based on traditional history and upon positive and numerous acts of ownership allegedly exercised by each side over the land for some considerable length of time.

 

---

HELD

---

The Supreme Court held that the learned trial Judge was right in holding that the defendants were estopped per rem judicatam from reopening the question of the ownership of the land in dispute which was adjudged vested in the plaintiffs.

 

---

ISSUES

---

Whether the learned trial Judge erred in law and misapplied the doctrine of res judicata

 

---

RATIONES DECIDENDI

---

ESSENTIALS OF A PLEA OF RES JUDICATA

---

“It is fundamental law that to sustain a plea of res judicata in a case the party raising the plea must show that the parties, the issues and subject-matter of the current case are the same as in the previous case adjudicated upon by a court of competent jurisdiction before whom the proceedings terminated to finality. Put in another way, a final judgment already decided between the same parties or their privies on the same question by a legally constituted court having jurisdiction is conclusive between the parties, and the issue cannot be raised again. This is founded on a public policy which requires that interest reipublicae ut sit finis litium.” Per ANIAGOLU, JSC

 

---

CASES CITED

---

Mills v. Cooper (1967) 2 All ER 100 at 104

 

---

STATUTES REFERRED TO

---

The Evidence Act

The Public Lands Acquisition Law

 

---

CLICK HERE TO READ FULL JUDGMENT