LEGAL PRINCIPLE: CIVIL PROCEDURE – Abuse of Process – Subsequent Action on Different Cause of Action Not an Abuse
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
The learned trial Judge was right when he held that the causes of action were dissimilar. The present action cannot, therefore, constitute an abuse of the process of court.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Ogundare, JSC, in *7-UP Bottling Company Ltd. & Ors v. Abiola and Sons Bottling Company Ltd.* (2001) NLC-631996(SC) at p. 29; Paras C–D.
"The learned trial Judge was right when he held that the causes of action were dissimilar. The present action cannot, therefore, constitute an abuse of the process of court."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
A subsequent action based on a different cause of action does not constitute abuse of process, even if between the same parties. Abuse requires multiplicity of suits on the same subject matter or relitigation of identical issues. Where the causes of action are dissimilar—arising from different facts, transactions, or legal bases—the later action is not vexatious. Parties may pursue distinct claims separately. The court examines whether the later action raises genuinely new issues not previously litigated. Dissimilarity prevents the earlier action from barring the later one. The principle balances preventing harassment with allowing legitimate separate claims. The test is identity of cause of action, not mere identity of parties.