High Court Civil Procedure Rules was considered by applying the test of litis contestatio, meaning the process of coming to an issue. The test denotes the stage when the party withdrawing his action is deemed to have lost his dominus litis, i.e. mastery of the suit and has, therefore, lost the privilege of moving the court for the particular final order to be made which in the changed circumstances is dictated by the justice of the particular case. In ERONINI V. IHEUKU (1989) 2 NWLR (PT. 101) 46; (1989) 1 NSCC 503, the doctrine was expounded by the Supreme Court where, at page 520, Nnaemaka-Agu, JSC, opined that: “In my view the rationale of the rule" i.e. in Soetan’s case, "is that once issues have been joined to be tried and the stage set for the conflict, then once a certain stage has been reached the plaintiff is no longer dominis litis and cannot be allowed to escape through the back door to enter again through another action." - 13 “The facts of Eronini’s case amply vindicate the merit of the doctrine. At the trial, after a few halting steps with the first witness for the plaintiff the plaintiff’s counsel who was taken aback by the witnesses evidence that was at variance with the plaintiff’s pleading stopped the witness from concluding his evidence and applied to the court to discontinue the case; the application was granted and the case was struck out. On appeal against the order striking out the action the Court of Appeal of Appeal affirmed the decision of the learned trial Judge. On a further appeal to the Supreme Court the decision was reversed and an order dismissing the action substituted therefore on the ground that at the time the plaintiff discontinued his action litis contestatio had been reached.” “In the instant case, the Respondents have filed their defences and some have gone further to file preliminary objection and the stage is set for conflict only for the Applicants to bring this application for withdrawal so that they can escape through the back door enter again and bring another action. We submit that at this stage of the case litis contestaio has been reached and the Applicant cannot be allowed to re-file after withdrawal. Consequently, we humbly but strongly urge the court to dismiss the Applicants’ suit after withdrawal.” “We further refer My Lord to the case of OMO V. AMANTU (1993) 3 NWLR (Pt. 280) 149where the court held; “There are several decided cases to the effect that any suit withdrawn after issues have been joined should be dismissed and not merely struck out. (See the case of ERONINI & ORS. V. IHEUKU (1989) 2 NWLR (PT. 101) 46; OLAYINKA RODRIGUES & ORS V. THE PUBLIC TRUSTEE &