Ratio Decidendi

Per Ogbuagu, JSC, in Ntuks & Ors v. NPA (2007) NLC-123-190-2003(SC) at pp. 5–6; Paras A–E:

"In order to satisfy such a plea of res judicata, the parties or their privies as the case may be, are the same in the present case as the previous case; the issues and subject-matter, are the same in the previous case as in the present case; the adjudication in the previous case, must have been given by a court of competent jurisdiction and the previous decision, must have finally, decided the issues between the parties."
View Judgment →

Explanation / Scope

The principle sets out the four essential elements of the plea of res judicata, also known as cause of action estoppel. All four conditions must be proved by the party raising the plea. The parties must be identical or in privity, meaning they share a legal interest. The issues and subject-matter must be the same, not merely similar. The previous court must have been competent in jurisdiction and constitution. The previous decision must have been final, meaning it disposed of the matter conclusively, not interlocutory. If any condition is absent, the plea fails. The principle ensures that once a dispute has been finally settled by a competent court, it is not reopened. It promotes judicial finality and prevents multiplicity of suits.

Cases Applying This Principle

S.O. Ntuks & Ors v. Nigerian Ports Authority