LEGAL PRINCIPLE: CONTRACT LAW — Settlement Agreements — Binding Effect — Acquiescence for Extended Period Precludes Repudiation
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
A party is bound by a settlement agreement; attempting to reopen the matter after 16 years, having acquiesced in the settlement for an extended period, ought not to be permitted.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Kutigi, JSC, and Ogwuegbu, JSC, in Igbinokpogie & Anor v. Ogedegbe (2001) NLC-1081991(SC) at p. 10; Paras D–E and p. 11; Paras A–B.
"The plaintiff is clearly bound by the terms of agreement (exhibit H), settling the dispute out of court in 1962, and his attempt to reopen the matter in 1978 some 16 years after settlement, ought not to have been permitted. The agreement exhibit 'H', in my view, amounts to an abandonment of the plaintiff's right to the 2nd defendant's portion which had been transferred to the 1st defendant."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
A settlement agreement is binding on the parties. Acquiescence in the settlement for a long period (e.g., 16 years) precludes later repudiation. The agreement constitutes an abandonment of rights under the original claim. The court will not permit a party to reopen settled matters after unreasonable delay. The principle promotes finality and encourages out-of-court settlements. The party cannot wait for years and then challenge the settlement. The burden is on the party seeking to repudiate to show grounds for setting aside the agreement. Long acquiescence without complaint is strong evidence of acceptance. The rule protects reliance on settlements.