“... the test to be applied for the purpose of determining whether a decision is a final or an interlocutory one was one which looked at the nature of the order made and not the nature of the proceedings. If the order determines the right of the parties it affects and conclusive on their rights so as to prevent the party whomsoever affected to further plead or adduce evidence against it before the trial court or court of coordinate jurisdiction with a view of upstaging it and such decision operates against, not only the party in the sense of revisiting the issue decided by the trial court, but also against the jurisdiction of the trial court in rendering it functus officio in reopening the issue or issues so settled. Once the decision is so conclusive on the issue determined as to sustain a plea of the doctrine of estoppel per rem judicata it is a final decision. In other words, a decision is a final decision within the context of section 241(1)(a) of the Constitution once the party affected is estopped per rem judicata from bringing once again the claim already determined by the trial court before the same court and the jurisdiction of the trial court to entertain the same issue again is equally ousted."

Per SALAMI, J.C.A. in AFRICAN INTERNATIONAL BANK LIMITED v. PACKOPLAST NIGERIA LTD CITATION: (2003) LPELR-7187(CA)