EVIDENCE LAW — Burden of Proof — Res Judicata — Burden on Party Asserting Different Subject Matter
Principle Statement
The parties having by their evidence admitted that there is only one No. 17 Olusola Street, Ikate Surulere at every material time the burden to prove that the judgment in Suit No. LA/168/87 relates to another No. 17 Olusola Street, Ikate Surulere remains on the Respondent.
Ratio Decidendi (Source)
Per Galadima, JCA (as he then was), in Alapo v. Agbokere & Anor (2010) NLC-123-83-2004(SC) at p. 8, paras. A–C.
"The parties having by their evidence admitted that there is only one No. 17 Olusola Street, Ikate Surulere at every material time the burden to prove that the judgment in Suit No. LA/168/87 relates to another No. 17 Olusola Street, Ikate Surulere remains on the Respondent."
Explanation / Scope
This principle establishes that where it is admitted that there is only one property, the burden is on the party asserting that a judgment relates to a different property to prove it. The principle applies where res judicata is pleaded. It ensures that the burden is properly placed. The principle reflects that he who asserts must prove. It prevents parties from avoiding estoppel without proof. The court must require proof. The principle provides guidance on the burden of proof in res judicata claims.
