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