"Now, the law recognizes and is firmly settled that the term "abuse of court process" is one about which no hard and fast rule can be laid down as to the precise, specific and closed situations in which it would arise in all cases. Essentially, abuse of a court process in any judicial proceedings depends and to be determined on the peculiar facts and circumstances of a case in which it is alleged or as may be determined by the court itself. Judicial authorities provide guideline on some factors, situations or circumstances which may constitute an abuse of a court process in a given case and include: -
(a) When a party to a proceedings of court improperly uses the issue of a judicial process to the irritation and annoyance of his opponent such as instituting a multiplicity of actions on the same subject matter against the same opponent on the same issue.
See Olutirin v. Agaka (1998) 6 NWLR (554) 366, Umeh v. Iwu (2008) 8 NWLR (1089) 225, NV SCHEEP V. MV "S" ARAZ" (2001) FWLR (1934) 543, Ladoja v. Ajimobi (supra).
(b) When a party/plaintiff files a notice of discontinuance so that he may have his way in a new suit.
See Okafor v. A.G. Anambra State (1991) 6 NWLR (200) 659, Olawore v. Olanrewaju (1998) 1 NWLR (534) 436, Jonpal Limited v. Afribank (2003) 8 NWLR (822) 290.
(c) When a party brings an action in a court that has no jurisdiction to adjudicate over it.
See Noah v. High Commissioner (1980) 8-11, SC, 100.
(d) That abuse of a court process is a term generally applied to a process which is wanting in bone fide and is frivolous, vexations or oppressive and is an abuse of legal procedure or improper use of a legal process which involves some deliberateness, malice, bias and desire to misuse, pervert or frustrate the course of justice in a case. Abuse of court process may and can arise in a variety and infinite situations and circumstances in judicial proceedings.
See Saraki v. Kotoye (supra) , The Vessel "Saint Roland" v. Osinloye (1997) 4 NWLR, 387, Olutirin v. Agaka (supra), Lokpobiri v. Ogola (supra), I.N.M.B. v. UBN (2004) 12 NWLR (888) 599.
(e) Where a party litigate again over identical question/s or issues which had already been decided against him.
Onyeabuchu v. INEC (2002) 8 NWLR (769) 417 @ 443". -
PER M. L. GARBA, J.C.A in the case of FIRST BANK OF NIGERIA LIMITED V. CHIEF ISAAC OSARO AGBARA & ORS & DR ADESOLA ADEDUNTAN & ANOR
LEGALPEDIA ELECTRONIC CITATION: LER(2019) CA/L/923/923CA/2018
