"Waiver operates as estoppel against "the person who is to enjoy the benefit or who has the choice of two benefits (and is) fully aware of his right to the benefit or benefits, but - either neglect to exercise his right to the benefit, or where he has the choice of the two, he decides to take one but not both": Ariori v. Elemo (supra) citing with approval VYVYAN v. VYVYAN 30 bear 60. The exercise of the right of waiver, as Eso, JSC, explains in Ariori v. ELEMO (supra), has to be voluntary, devoid of any legal disability. It operates thus: if a person with full knowledge of the rights, interest, profits or' benefits conferred upon or accruing to him by and under the law, intentionally decides to give up all these, or some of them, he cannot be heard to complain afterwards that he has not been permitted the exercise of his right, or that he has suffered by his not having exercised his rights. In the circumstance, just like in the instant case, he should be held to have waived his rights and consequently estopped from raising the issue subsequently”.

PER E.EKO, J.S.C IN THE CASE OF COUNTY & CITY BRICKS DEVELOPMENT COMPANY LTD VS HON. MINISTER OF ENVIRONMENT HOUSING & URBAN DEVELOPMENT & ANOR : LER [2019]SC.239/2011