PSYCHIATRIC HOSPITALS MANAGEMENT BOARD VS E. O. EJITAGHA
June 25, 2025G.C. AKPUNONU & ANOR VS BEAKART OVERSEAS & ORS
June 25, 2025Legalpedia Citation: (2000) Legalpedia (SC) 19919
In the Supreme Court of Nigeria
Fri Jul 14, 2000
Suit Number: SC. 53/1995
CORAM
S.M.A BELGORE JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
E.O. OGWUEGBU JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
A.I. IGUH JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
O. ACHIKE JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
A.O. EJIWUNMI JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
PARTIES
DR. RASAKI OSHODI(Substituted for Alhaji K.D. Oshodi and family) CHIEF G.F.A. INASA THOMAS (For himself and on behalf of Oshodi Arota Ologun family of Lagos)CHIEF MUSA ESUGBAYI OSHODI (Substituted for R/D. Oshodi for themselves and on behalf of Oshodi family) APPELLANTS
RESPONDENTS
AREA(S) OF LAW
SUMMARY OF FACTS
The Respondents/plaintiffs claimed against the appellant/defendant forfeiture of his customary tenancy for denying the plaintiffs title to the disputed land.
HELD
The Court held that the grant to the Appellant/defendant was an absolute grant and that the appellant/defendant now holds the land in dispute as owners and not as customary tenants.
ISSUES
1. whether or not the Court of Appeal was right in holding that the plea of estoppel per rem judicatam did not avail the defendants by reason of their alleged failure to establish that the subject matter of the dispute in suit No. AB/I 6/57 is the same as the land in dispute in the present case.2. Whether the decisions in the said suits numbers AB/16/57 and FSC. 413/61 do not create issue estoppel to bar the plaintiffs from relitigating the issues therein decided.3. Whether the plaintiffs established their ownership of the land in dispute and the other reliefs claimed against the defendants.
RATIONES DECIDENDI
SCOPE OF APPELLATE JURISDICTION OF THE COURT OF APPEAL
“The appellate jurisdiction of the Court of Appeal is to hear and determine appeals from the High Courts. If a finding or decision of a trial court, whether on an issue of fact or law is not challenged in an appeal to the Court of Appeal, such a finding or decision, rightly or wrongly, must not be disturbed for the purposes of the appeal in question.” Per A.I Iguh JSC
CONDITIONS FOR ESTOPPEL PER REM JUDICATAM
“For the plea of estoppel per rem judicatam to succeed, the party relying on it must establish that –
“i. The parties or their privies are the same, that is to say, that the parties involved in both previous and present proceedings are the same;
ii. The claim or the issue in dispute in both the previous and present actions are the same;
iii. The res, that is to say, the subject matter of the litigation in the two cases is the same;
iv. The decision relied upon to support the plea of estoppel per rem judicatam must be valid, subsisting and final and
v. The court that gave the previous decision relied upon to sustain the plea must be a court of competent jurisdiction.
Unless the above pre-conditions are established the plea of estoppel per rem judicatam cannot be sustained”. Per A.I Iguh JSC
ESSENCE OF EVIDENCE
“Evidence must be directed and confined to the proof or disproof of the issues as settled by the pleadings”. Per A.I Iguh JSC
CASES CITED
1. Oke v. Atoloye (1985) I N.W.L.R. (Pt, 15) 241 at 260, 2. Yoye v. Olabode and others (1974) 1 All N.L.R. (Pt. 2)118 at 122, 3. Idowu Alasa others v. Sanya Olori Ilu (1965) N.M.R. 66, 4. Fadiora v. Gbadebo (1978) 3 S.C. 219 at 229. 5. Nwabueze v. Okoye (1988) 4 N.W.L.R. (Pt. 91) 664. 6. Esso Petroleum Co. Ltd. v. Southport Corporation (1956) A.C. 218.
STATUTES REFERRED TO
NONE
