In 1884 when Ido town was founded there were eight major compounds including Okusin and Okoro. The first daughter of Okusin, Oko together with her household came to the present town of Ido to re-establish the compound. Later her sister Ikpaiko and her son Awo joined her in Ido in the compound named Oko Polo and later changed to Okusin Polo by all A Descendants of Okusin. After the death of Oko her first son Iganikon became the head of the Okusin family, and was succeeded by Chief Nelson Okusin. The Plaintiffs traced the history of the Defendants' family and their relationship with the Plaintiffs which came about through marriage with Alibo of Okoro compound and so Okusin Polo can never be named after Alibo, which the Defendants want to effect vide a letter. The Defendants wrote another letter to the Plaintiffs' Head of Okusin family denouncing his headship of Okusin compound. Consequently, the Plaintiff took the 1st-4th Defendants before the Ido Council of Chiefs, who asserted that the land upon which the compound was situated was clear initially by Awo Alibo and his descendant Dewari. The Plaintiffs were not satisfied and they initiated a further process to Abbey House of Buguma, the Arbitration of which the 1st-4th Defendants declined. The actions of the Defendants led to the institution of this action in the High Court

The Defendants in their amended statement of defence denied most of the Plaintiffs' allegations, adding that at the Arbitration, both parties paid the Arbitration fees and were sworn with their witnesses on oath under pain of death to speak the truth before the decision was given. For that they relied on waiver, estoppel per rem judicatam, and estoppel by conduct. The Defendants denied that Okusin and Okoro were any of the eight major compounds/houses at the time of the settlement at New Ido in 1884, but that their chieftaincy stools were created by members of their families. They denied that Oko established or headed the Okusin family as it was even contrary to Kalabari Custom. They traced their rights and roots to Alibo, their own ancestor.

After the completion of pleadings both parties adduced evidence, which were evaluated by the learned trial Judge who at the end of the day entered judgment in favour of the Plaintiffs. Dissatisfied with the decision, the Defendants appealed to the Court of Appeal, which affirmed the decision of the trial Court, and dismissed the appeal. The Defendants have again appealed to this Court on four grounds of appeal. The Plaintiffs are also dissatisfied with certain aspects of the, decision and they have cross-appealed.