A consent judgment is a final decision, since it finally determines the issues and dispute between the parties. (See NWRD v. Jaiyesimi (1963) 1 All NLR 215). It is a final decision within Section 241(1)(a) of the Constitution 1999. However, leave of the High Court or of the Court of Appeal is required for the exercise of a right of appeal. (See Section 241(2)(c) of the Constitution 1999).
– Karibi-Whyte, JSC. Afegbai v. A.G Edo State (2001)
SHARE ON
There is a consent judgment where parties to an action in court have fashioned out an agreement as to how to settle their dispute out of court and apply to the court to give judgment on the terms they have agreed upon. Such judgment when given is called a judgment by consent and serves as a final determination of the dispute between the parties.
– Karibi-Whyte, JSC. Afegbai v. A.G Edo State (2001)
A consent judgment will not be set aside on grounds of unilateral mistake, unless the mistake was induced by fraud or misrepresentation. (See Akinwunmi v. Idewu (1969) 1 All NLR 319).
– Karibi-Whyte, JSC. Afegbai v. A.G Edo State (2001)
A consent judgment will be set aside on any ground which may invalidate an agreement on which it is founded would be rescinded. When therefore, a consent judgment is sought to be set aside on the ground of fraudulent misrepresentation, the same principles apply as would apply were the action one for rescission of a contract.
– Ayoola, JSC. Afegbai v. A.G Edo State (2001)
It is obvious and not disputed that plaintiff was aware of the arrangement to settle out of court, the action instituted by him against the defendants. He was also aware that the arrangement was to allocate another piece of land to him in lieu of monetary compensation for his piece of land compulsorily acquired. This arrangement was acceptable to him and he instructed Mr R. A. Oluyede to represent him in the negotiation. Mr Oluyede entered into the negotiation, representing the plaintiff, signed the terms of agreement with the defendants in which Plot 263 Etete Lay-Out was allocated to plaintiff and as Counsel this agreement was entered as the judgment of the Court in the suit. The judgment so entered by consent of the parties is valid and enforceable. The fact that the terms of agreement were negotiated and the judgment entered by Counsel on behalf of plaintiff and not by the plaintiff himself with the defendants did not affect its validity by an iota. This is because plaintiff has given to his Counsel a general authority without limitation to act on his behalf and to represent him in the action.
– Karibi-Whyte, JSC. Afegbai v. A.G Edo State (2001)
In Huddersfield Banking Co Ltd v. Henry Lister & Son Ltd. [1895-9] All ER Rep 868 it was held that a consent order made by the court to give effect to the compromise of a legal claim by the parties concerned can be set aside, not only on ground of fraud, but for any reason which would afford a ground for setting aside the agreement on which the order was made, for example, on the ground of a common mistake regarding a material fact. In that case Lindley, CJ, said:- “The only thing, to my mind, to be done on this point of setting aside a consent judgment is to see whether the agreement upon which it was based can be invalidated or not. If the agreement cannot be invalidated, the consent order is good. If the agreement can be invalidated, the consent order is bad.”
“A consent judgment or order is said to have atleast two broad meanings. In the first sense, it occurs when parties in litigation agree to strike a compromise which they embodied in the agreement signed by them or their counsel which they filed in the registry and is subsequently made an order of court. In the second sense is, where a party submits himself because he cannot resist it mainly due to the fact that he has nothing to offer against it. See Festus –V- African Action Congress (AAC) (2020) 4 NWLR (prt. 1714) 276 at 296 – 297”.
– PER M.L. SHUAIBU, J.C.A. Cross & Star v. Government of Cross River State (2022)
Click the icons to like, follow, and join JPoetry