MR. MICHAEL IKPEAMANAM v. UNION BANK OF NIGERIA PLC ANOR
(2014)LCN/6922(CA)
RATIO
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE: WHAT CONSTITUTE THE DEFENCE OF RES JUDIATA TO WARRANT THE DISMISSAL OF AN ACTION
Now, my first port of call in treating the lone issue for determination is to ascertain the meaning of Res Judicata. It is defined on page 1336 of Black’s Law Dictionary, Eighth Edition by Bryan A. Garner thus:
(Latin “a thing adjudicated”) 1. “An issue that has been definitively settled by judicial decision. 2. An affirmative defense barring the same parties from litigating a second lawsuit on the same claim, or any other claim arising from the same transaction or series of transactions and that could have been – but was not – raised in the first suit.”
The law is settled and defined beyond peradventure in a long chain of decided cases of both this Court and the apex Court that for a party relying on the defence of Res judicata to succeed, he must satisfy the following conditions:
1. That the parties or their privies are the same in both the previous and present proceedings.
2. That the claim or issue in dispute in both actions is the same.
3. That the res of the subject matter of the litigation in the cases are the same.
4. That the decision relied upon to support the plea of estoppel is valid, subsisting and final.
5. That the court that gave the previous decision relied upon to sustain the plea is a court of competent jurisdiction.
See the following cases: OLORUNTOBA-OJU v. ABDUL-RAHEEM (2009) AFWLR (PART 497) AT PAGE 38; ADONE vs. IKEBUDU (2001) FWLR (PART 72) 1893 and YOYE vs. OLUBODE (1994) 10 SC 209
The law is well settled and defined in a host of decided cases both by this Court and the apex Court that for the doctrine of Res Judicata to be successfully established all the conditions set out supra must be met. See Oluruntoba v. Abdul-Raheem (supra) Adone v. Ikebudu (2001) 14 NWLR (Part 733) page 385; Oke v. Atoloye (1985) 2 NWLR (Part 9) 578; Yoye v. Olabode (1974) 10 SC, 209; Alase v. Olori-Ilu (1965) NMLR 66; Fadiori v. Gbadebo (1978) 3 SC 219 and Iga v. Amakiri (1976) 11 SC Page 1.
I am of the firm view that the Respondents failed to establish by credible evidence two out of the five conditions enunciated by our Courts for successful plea of Res Judicata. This being so, the sole issue for determination is resolved in favour of the Appellant and against the Respondents Per TIJJANI ABDULLAHI, J.C.A.
