LEGAL PRINCIPLE: EVIDENCE LAW — Estoppel — Parties Cannot Re-Litigate Issues Lost in Previous Suit Under Different Guise
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
Where plaintiffs conceded title in a previous suit, they cannot later relitigate the same issue under a different guise. They hold possession as customary tenants, not as owners with exclusive possession warranting presumption of ownership.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Iguh, JSC, in Faleye v. Otapo (1995) NLC-31993(SC) at pp. 38–39; Paras. D–A.
"Where the plaintiffs in Exhibit A conceded the title in the land to the present defendants through their grandfather, Kole, who was a tenant to the Eleidi Atala family, and where the plaintiffs through their privy, Kole, in Exhibit A are still occupying the land in dispute despite that judgment, the plaintiffs are by virtue of Exhibit A holding on to possession as customary tenants of the defendants through their privy in title, Kole, and not that they have any exclusive possession which may warrant the presumption of ownership."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
A party cannot relitigate issues already decided. Conceding title in a previous suit binds the party. The principle applies to all civil proceedings. The party cannot change the nature of their interest. The rule prevents abuse of process. The court will enforce the previous judgment. The party holds only as a tenant, not as owner.