Mrs Omotokunbo Abiodun Daria & 6 Ors v Nirsal Plc
| Judge | Honourable Justice Sanusi Kado |
| Judgment Date | 07 May 2020 |
| Respondent | Nirsal Plc |
| Appellant | Mrs Omotokunbo Abiodun Daria & 6 Ors |
| Docket Number | NICN/ABJ/139/2018 |
| Counsel | IV. A DECLARATION that the termination of appointment of the Claimants in the Defendant Organization without any approval by the BOARD OF DIRECTORS of the Defendant is illegal, null and void as same is against international best practices in corporate Governance. V. AN ORDER of this Honourable Court by way of mandatory injunction compelling the Defendant, its agents, servants, privies and by whatsoever name called to immediately re-instate the claimants herein to their position at the Nigeria Incentive Based Risk Sharing System for Agricultural Lending. |
| Court | National Industrial Court (Nigeria) |
1. The claimants approached this Court via general form of complaint dated 15/05/2018 and filed 16/05/2018. The complaint was accompanied with Statement of facts, witness statement on oath, list of witnesses, list of documents and photocopies of documents to be relied on at trial. The claimants vide this action are seeking for the following reliefs;-
I. A DECLARATION that the termination of appointments of the claimants via letters dated July 17, 2017 and issued by the Defendant is irregular, illegal, null and void and of no effect whatsoever.
V. AN ORDER of this Honourable Court by way of mandatory injunction compelling the Defendant, its agents, servants, privies and by whatsoever name called to immediately re-instate the claimants herein to their position at the Nigeria Incentive Based Risk Sharing System for Agricultural Lending.
VI. AN ORDER of this Honourable Court compelling the Defendant, its agents, servants, privies and by whatsoever name called to immediately pay over to the claimants their monthly salaries and other benefits as accrued from the date of termination of appointment up to date judgment is delivered. VII. AN ORDER of this Honourable Court compelling the Defendant, its agents, servants, privies and by whatsoever name called to immediately pay over to the claimants as general damages the sum of N70,000,000.00 (Seventy Million Naira) only for terminating the appointment of the claimants without recourse to due process. VIII. AN ORDER of this Honourable Court compelling the Defendant to pay over to the claimants the sum of N35, 000,000.00 (Thirty Five Million Naira) only as punitive and aggravated damages for being subjected to psychological trauma, physical and dehumanizing condition following the termination of their appointment.2. The Defendant entered conditional appearance on 13/07/2018 and with leave of court granted on 22/11/2018, filed statement of defence dated 12/07/2018 and filed on the 13/08/2018 which was accompanied by a written statement on Oath, Defendant’s list of witnesses, Defendant’s list of documents, photocopies of document to be relied on at the trial.
CASE OF THE CLAIMANTS.3. The claimants opened their case on 8/01/2019, wherein Mrs. Abiodun Omotokunbo Daria testified as CW1. CW1, after adopting her witness statement on oath tendered documents in evidence. The documents were admitted in evidence and marked accordingly. The 3rd Claimant, Mrs. Mercy Gambo Mayaki, testified as CW 2 on the 6th day of March 2019, she adopted her Witness Statement on Oath dated the 16th day of May, 2018 and an Additional Statement on Oath dated the 21st day of November, 2018. No document was tendered through her.
4. From the statement of facts, witness statement on Oath and the oral testimony of the witnesses that testified, the case of the Claimants is that they were all employees of the defendant, till their employment were unceremonious terminated by the defendant. At the time their appointments were terminated they were on probation. The termination of their appointments was at the instance of the Managing Director of the Defendant without any justifiable reason and without affording them the opportunity to make any form of representation before any duly constituted Board or Panel of Inquiry. They contended that the said termination is illegal, null and void.
5. The Claimants contends that the Defendant is wholly owned and controlled by the Federal Government of Nigeria and that the Directors of the Defendant are highly placed Federal Government Executives such as the Governor of the Central Bank of Nigeria, some Executive Directors in the Central Bank of Nigeria, captains of industries among others.
6. The claimants further stated that following their appointments into different positions in the Defendant’s Organization; they discharged their respective official assignments diligently and responsibly they also stated that upon official resumption at the Defendant’s Organization, they observed that there was no structured and well outlined pattern of discharging official responsibilities expected in a Corporate Organization. As experienced professionals in different fields of human endeavors, claimants made their individual observations known to the Defendants herein at various meetings held at the Defendants Office and that the Defendants failed to hearken to the claimants’ professional and administrative advice.
7. Finally, the Claimants contend that as at the 11th day of October 2017 when a search was conducted at the Corporate Affairs Commission Abuja, there was no filed Resolution by the defendant stating or confirming that their appointments into various positions in her Organization have been terminated. The Claimants are praying the Court to grant their reliefs as stated on the complaint.
8. Under cross examination CW1 testified that she was trying to set up her chambers because she has been unable to get another job. She further stated that she was aware of the importance of oath and that she deposed to her witness statement on oath at the Industrial Court Registry. she further testified that she served with Midas Bank and was retained when FCMB acquired by Midas Bank and that she worked with FCMB from 2006 to 2013 and that she resigned from her appointment in another Bank in February, 2017 to join the defendant company. She further testified that she responded to the advert in the newspaper in August 2016 and applied for employment from the defendant and she was offered the employment in January, 2017 which she accepted and resumed on 6/3/17. She stated that she was invited to Lagos for interview and she was interviewed by the MD and ED and the consultant from the recruitment firm. She testified that when they were employed they were told that there was no process because the company was new and they were to set up processes. However she sought audience with the MD for further clarification but did not get the appointment with him, so she just requested for job description from Human Resources Department and they informed her that her role as the Head of Legal and Board Matters included drafting of legal documents, advising the company and its subsidiaries. She further testified that the claimants were not given notice prior to the termination of their employment but they were paid one month’s salary in lieu of notice. She stated that the claimant’s case was that the defendant failed to give them 2 weeks’ notice and it is a public service institution which is required under 1999 constitution section 318 to abide by the provisions of the Public service Rules and the defendant ought to have complied with the Public Service Rules in terminating their appointment. CW1 testified that she agreed that they were indeed on probation.
9. Under cross examination CW2 testified that her designation was Assistant General Manger when she was with the Defendant. AGM Agric value chain and technical Assistance and that her function was basically to liaise with stakeholders. She further testified that she possesses a Master’s degree and her first degree was in Mathematics and computer sciences and that considering her educational qualification she was well read. When shown EXHIBIT CWI11-3 she admitted that it was her letter of employment and that she read and accepted the content of the letter that was why she accepted. She stated that she signed the acceptance on 6/03/2017. She also testified that she had worked both with CBN and also as a civil servant before and she was aware of the procedure for employment of civil servants but she does not know if the procedure for employment for civil service was used in this case. She further stated that she never threatened the MD, rather she sent an internal memo asking for the reason for her demotion and the next thing she saw was her letter of termination.
10. The defendant opened its case on 13/05/2019 by calling only one witness, Mr. Khalil Mohammed Kabir who testified as DW1. He adopted his Witness Statement on Oath dated the 13/07/2018. The letters of appointments of the claimants were tendered through this witness, as well as a Letter with a letter head of Federal Ministry of Justice dated 16/1/2018, addressed to Managing Director of the Defendant, marked as Exhibit DG 1-2.
11. The Defendant’s case is that it is a self-governing legal entity, registered with the Corporate Affairs Commission as a Private Limited Liability Company and as such prayed this Honourable Court to dismiss the Claimants’ claims. It was stated that recruitment of staff is not and has never been carried out by the Federal Civil Service Commission. That employment in the defendant is not being regulated by the PUBLIC SERVICE RULES, 2009 and that based on its policy on recruitment, a staff is not employed unconditionally; rather he/she is employed on probation usually for a period of Six (6) months within which the Defendant or the staff may decide to terminate the contract at will. It is also the Defendant’s defence that the Claimants were offered...
To continue reading
Request your trial