CORAM
ANTHONY IKECHUKWU IGUH JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
ALOYSUIS IYORGYER KATSINA-ALU, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
PARTIES
OLOWO OKUKUJE [For himself and on hehalf of Akpara Family of Ofegbe Village, Isoko Division] APPELLANTS
RESPONDENTS
AREA(S) OF LAW
SUMMARY OF FACTS
The defendant relied on a previous decision in which the plaintiff was sued in a personal capacity over a smaller land as defence to the present action which was instituted and defended in representative capacity and over a larger land.
HELD
The court allowed the appeal and held that the lower was in error in holding that the plaintiff was estopped.
ISSUES
(1) whether the Defendant made out a case for the application of both estoppel per rem judicatam and issue estoppel
RATIONES DECIDENDI
CONDITIONS FOR THE APPLICATION OF THE PLEA OF RES JUDICATA
For the doctrine of estoppel per rem judicatam to apply, it must be shown that:
[a] the parties;
[b] the issues, and
[c] the subject matter
in the previous action were the same as those in the action in which the plea is raised. Once these ingredients of res judicata are established, the previous judgment estops the plaintiff from making any claim contrary to the decision in the previous case – Katsina- Alu J.S.C.
CASES CITED
1. Odjewedje v. Echanokpe [1987] 1 NWLR [Pt. 52] 633;2. Ezeanya v. Okeke (1995) NWLR [Pt. 388] 142;3. Dokubo v. Omoni [1999] 8 NWLR [Pt. 616] 6474. Shitta Bey & Ors. v. The Chairman LEDB & Ors. (1962) NSCC Vol. 2 p. 252.
STATUTES REFERRED TO
NONE