Para. 13: “The Court is of the view that the argument concerning res judicata can only succeed when it is established that the Application brought before it is essentially the same as another one already satisfactorily decided upon before a competent domestic court.”
— Tasheku v FRN (2012) – ECW/CCJ/RUL/12/12
SHARE ON
In Aro v. Fabolude (1983) 2 SC 75 per Aniagolu, J.S.C. (as he then was) laid down the ingredients of the plea of res-judicata in these words – “In civil cases, before the principle is applied, the res (the subject matter) in contention must be the same; the issue and the parties the same in the new case as in the earlier proceedings. Where any of the three matters is missing in the new case a plea of res-judicata will ordinarily fail (See Odua v. Nwanze (1934) 2 WACA 98 at 100 – 102.)”
From the cumulative summary of the foregoing authorities, it is clear that the existence of the principle is entirely a question of fact for purpose of establishing whether the parties and their privies, the facts in issue and the subject matter of the claim are the same in both the previous and the present suits....
Para. 20: In Aliyu Tasheku V. FRN, ECW/CCJ/RUL/12/12, (unreported), The Court was of the view that the argument concerning res judicata can only succeed when it is established that the Application brought before it is essentially the same as another one already satisfactorily decided upon before a competent Domestic Court or an International Tribunal.
SALAMI AFOLABI V. GOVERNOR OF OSUN STATE (2003) 13 NWLR (Pt.386) 119 at 129 – 130 the Supreme Court emphasized thus: “It is settled law that to sustain in a plea of res judicata, the party pleading it must satisfy the following conditionalities, to wit – i. That parties (or their privies as they may...
The law is settled that where an issue of fact affecting the status of a person or a thing has been determined in a final manner as a substantive part of a judgment of a court having jurisdiction to determine that status, such determination will constitute estoppel by judgment to any subsequent proceedings between any...
Para. 19: “The doctrine of res judicata simply states that once a matter/cause has been finally determined, it is not open to either party to re-open or re-litigate that same matter. A matter is said to be res judicata if it has already been adjudicated upon by a competent Court. This prevents it from being pursued further by the same parties. Res judicata precludes the continued litigation of same issues between the same parties. The matter cannot be raised again either in the same Court or in a different Court. In other words, for a plea of res judicata to be sustained, both the subject matter and parties must be the same.”
— Osaghae v Nigeria (2017) – ECW/CCJ/JUD/03/17
Click the icons to like, follow, and join JPoetry