LEGAL PRINCIPLE: CIVIL PROCEDURE — Res Judicata — Public Policy Basis for Res Judicata
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
Public policy demands that there should be an end to litigation once a Court of competent jurisdiction has settled by a final decision, the matters in contention between the parties; the maxim interest reipublica ut sit finis litium (it is in the interest of the state that there be an end to litigation) and the principle that no man ought to be twice vexed for one and the same cause are the twin foundations of the doctrine of res judicata.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Aniagolu, JSC (as adopted) Ito & Ors v. Ekpe & Ors (2000) NLC-61993(SC) at pp. 11–12; Paras. E–A.
"Public policy demands that there should be an end to litigation once a Court of competent jurisdiction has settled by a final decision, the matters in contention between the parties. Not only must the Court not encourage prolongation of a dispute, it must also discourage proliferation of litigation. And so the maxim interest reipublica ut sit finis litium has for long been accepted as one of the established principles of our law. Of equal importance in our law — that no man ought to be twice vexed, if it is proved to the Court that it is for one and the same cause."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
The doctrine of res judicata rests on twin public policy pillars. First, interest reipublicae ut sit finis litium—the state has an interest in ending litigation to preserve judicial resources and ensure finality. Second, no man should be twice vexed for the same cause—protecting individuals from the burden of relitigating settled disputes. These principles mandate that once a competent court delivers a final decision on the merits, the matter is conclusively resolved. Courts must discourage prolonged or proliferated litigation, giving res judicata its binding force.