BEST LAW REPORT SUBSCRIPTION PRICE!!

  • Daniel Tayar Transport Ent. Co. (Nig.) Ltd. vs. Busari
  • 167
  • 2003-08-11
  • ₦ 200
  • Buy Now

Daniel Tayar Transport Ent. Co. (Nig.) Ltd. vs. Busari

DANIEL TAYAR TRANSPORT ENTERPRISES CO. LTD.

V

ALHAJI LIADI BUSARI

LAMIDI YUSUF DARAMOLA

( For themselves and as representatives of Ashade Family of Iba Town)

COURT OF APPEAL

( LAGOS DIVISION )

JAMES OGENYI OGEBE, JCA ( Presided )

PIUS OLAYIWOLA ADEREMI, JCA ( Read the Lead Judgment )

ABUBAKAR ABDUL-KADIR JEGA, JCA

CA/L/303/2000

MONDAY, 30TH JUNE, 2003

APPEAL - Ground of appeal - Issue not covered by any ground of appeal - Need to be struck out

COURT - Whether can give judgment against a non-party to a suit

EDUCATION - Continued legal education - Need for revival of for legal practitioners

ESTOPPEL - Res judicata - Doctrine of - Rationale therefor

ESTOPPEL - Res judicata - Party setting up plea thereof - Onus on to prove  same

ESTOPPEL - Res judicata - Successful plea of - Effect

ESTOPPEL - Res judicata - Successful plea of - Pre-conditions therefor

JUDGMENT AND ORDERS - Judicial decision - Final judicial decision on a matter - Whether estops parties thereto from re-litigating same

LEGAL PRACTITIONER - Bias against trial Judge alleged by a legal practitioner in a ground of appeal - When unsubstantiated - Effect

LEGAL PRACTITIONER - Continued legal education - Need for revival of for legal practitioners

LEGAL PRACTITIONER - Counsel - Need for to employ decent and civilised language in criticising a Judge

PARTIES - Non-party to a suit - Whether court can give judgment thereagainst

PLEADINGS - Object of

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE - Judicial decision - Final judicial decision on a matter - Whether estops parties thereto from re-litigating same

Issue:

Whether the consent judgment of 20th November, 1972 which was affirmed by the Supreme Court on 12th June, 1980 operates as res judicata in this suit.

Facts:

The respondents as plaintiffs for themselves and as representatives of Ashade family of Iba town instituted an action against the appellant and two others as defendants in the High Court of Lagos State, Ikeja Division where they claimed declaration, damages and perpetual injunction.

At a point during the trial, counsel to the 1st defendant, now the only appellant, brought a summons on notice challenging the competence of the trial Judge to adjudicate in the case on the ground that the suit was caught by the doctrine of res judicata and, as according to them, the matter had been decided by the Supreme Court in a consent judgment delivered by same court in SC. 24/1979 on 12th June 1980.

The plaintiffs/respondents in opposing the summons filed a counteraffidavit. The learned trial Judge, in a considered ruling, delivered on 18th of December, 1988, dismissed the summons.

Being dissatisfied with the said ruling, the 1st defendant appealed to the Court of Appeal.