Download PDF
JUDGMENT Introduction & Claims 1. The Claimant commenced this suit by a writ of summons, statement of facts and other frontloaded processes dated and filed on 7/10/16. In it, the Claimant sought the following reliefs against the Defendant - 1. The sum of =N=467,500.00 (Four Hundred and Sixty-Seven Thousand, Five Hundred Naira only) being accumulated arrears of salary and leave allowance due with effect from March 2015 to March 2016. 2. The sum of =N=595,000.00 (Five Hundred and Ninety-Five Thousand Naira only) being accumulated arrears of benefit/entitlement and pension due with effect from April 2008 to March 2016 with interest thereon at the rate of 21% per annum. 3. Cost of this action including Solicitor's fee in sum of =N=500,000.00 (Five Hundred Thousand Naira only). Defence and Counter claim 2. The Defendant reacted by filing its defence processes along with the necessary frontloaded documents and counter claimed for the sum of =N=25,000.00 from the Claimant/Defendant to counter claim for failing to give a month's notice of resignation. Case of the Claimant 3. Claimant commenced his case on 3/10/17 and testified in chief as CW1, adopted his witness deposition of 2/8/17 as his evidence in chief and tendered 3 documents as exhibits. The documents were admitted in evidence and marked as Exh. C1-Exh. C3. The case of the Claimant as revealed in his pleadings and evidence led is that he was employed by the Defendant as a Bouncer in its company, Int’l Co-Operation Ind. Nigeria Ltd via a letter of employment dated 1/4/08; that due to his performance of duty, the Defendant at various times increased his salary and emoluments; that on 31/3/15 he was arrested and accused with another person for conspiracy to steal and stealing jewelries and cash worth Millions of Naira; that as a result his monthly salary for the month of March 2015 till March 2016 when he resigned via a letter dated 22/3/16 from the Defendant’s employment were not paid and that he instituted this suit as a result of the Defendant’s refusal to pay him his accumulated arrears of salary, leave allowance and other entitlements due to him as an employee of the Defendant. 4. Under cross examination, Claimant testified that he was aware that on 31/3/15 some people stole some property in his place of work; that he was a Bouncer at the time; that he was the only one upstairs that night but 4 security men were downstairs; that he was at work downstairs; that he was at work on 31/3/15, was arrested by the Police same day and charged to Court and that between the time he was arrested and the date of his resignation he did not go to work for Defendant. Case of the Defendant 5. The Defendant opened its defence on15/1/18 by calling one Charles Archibong. Witness adopted his witness deposition dated 26/10/16 and tendered 3 documents as exhibits. The documents tendered were admitted in evidence and marked as Exh. D1-Exh. D3.The case of the Defendant is that the Claimant sued it for not paying his (the Claimant) salary for period of March, 2015 to March, 2016, when the Claimant absconded from its services for a year before willingly tendering his resignation letter; that meanwhile, the Claimant was arrested at the Area H Police Command and charged to Court for stealing jewelries worth Millions of Naira; that as a result Claimant stopped going to work without being asked to stop coming to work by the Defendant and that after about a year of absconding from work, the Claimant brought a resignation letter to take immediate effect from the same date the Claimant’s resignation was served on the Defendant. 6. Under cross examination witness testified that he worked for the Defendant as the Chief Security Officer; that he joined Defendant on 3/5/03; that he did not meet the Claimant in the Defendant then; that as at 2003 he was earning =N=25,000. 00; that his salary has increased to =N=40,000.00; that the Defendant has been increasing the salary of its staff; that the Defendant has Administrative Department with four staff; that the Defendant also has Security Department with about 12 staff; that the Defendant pays its staff by cash; that only Security Staff do morning and night shift; that night duty is from 6.00pm to 6.00am; that those on morning shift will take over then; that on 30/3/15 Claimant was on night duty with the Defendant; that Claimant was to resume work in the night of 31/3/15 and that Claimant was not convicted of any crime while working with the Defendant. Witness added that on 31/3/15 he reported the Claimant to the Police and Claimant was subsequently charged to Court; that he is not aware that the Claimant was detained at the Police Station; that between 31/3/15 and 2/4/15 Claimant did not report for work; that there was a case against the Claimant and he was handed over to the Police; that the Police was doing its investigation; that he did not write any letter to the Claimant since he knew he was being investigated and that he does know if the Defendant makes deduction for pension from salary of staff. Submissions of Learned Counsel 7. On 19/9/18 a 6-page final written address was filed on behalf of the Claimant. It was dated the same day. In it learned Counsel set down 3 main issues down for determination. They are as follows - 1. Whether or not the Claimant is an employee of the Defendant from April 2008 till 22nd day of March, 2016. 2. Whether or not the Claimant being an employee of the Defendant is not entitled to his normal salaries and other entitlements and benefits from the Defendant when he resigned from his employment. 3. Whether or not the Claimant is entitled to his benefits including gratuity or his pension due with effect from April 2008 to March 2016. 8. In arguing these issues, learned Counsel submitted that by virtue of Exh. C1 which is Claimant's letter of employment he was employed by the Defendant; that Claimant was discharged of the criminal allegations against him by the Magistrate Court in Ikeja; that he remained in the employment of the Defendant till his date of discharge as his employment was not terminated and that Claimant subsequently tendered his letter of resignation of employment through his Counsel. Counsel submitted that the Claimant is entitled to his salaries for the period of criminal trial in the Magistrate Court and that his gratuity or pension must be paid also by the Defendant. Learned Counsel prayed the Court to enter judgment in favor of the Claimant. 9. The 6-page final written address of the Defendant was filed on 18/10/18. Two issues were set down for determination as follows - 1. Whether the claim of the Claimant is sustainable in Law. 2. Whether the Claimant is entitled to Pension without being a contributor to the Pension Scheme. 10. In arguing these issues, learned Counsel submitted, citing Strag v. Adeyeta (2001)19 WRN (CA) that an employer who hires has the overriding power to fire the employee at any time as long as it is done within the contract of service and that an employee could also terminate the contract in like manner; that by Exh. D2 all that is required to terminate the contract was a month's notice or a month's salary in lieu of the same; that Claimant in response to a question under cross examination had stated that he did not work for the Defendant for a period of one year before his resignation and that no one directed him not to come to work; that the Claimant voluntarily resigned from his employment without payment of one month's salary in lieu; that Claimant did not contribute to any pension scheme and hence he is not entitled to such payment. Learned Counsel prayed the Court to dismiss the case of the Claimant. Decision 11. I carefully read and clearly understood all the processes filed by the learned Counsel on either side. I listened attentively to the oral testimonies of the witnesses who appeared before me in this matter and watched their demeanor. I have patiently evaluated all the exhibits tendered and admitted as well as listened to the oral submission of learned Counsel. Having done all this, I narrow the issues for the just determination of this case to the following - 1. Whether on the facts and evidence led, the Claimant has adduced sufficiently cogent and credible evidence in proof of his case. 2. Whether the Defendant has also proved its counter claim. 12. The simple case of the Claimant is that he was employed by the Defendant as a Bouncer by a letter to that effect dated 1/4/08; that on 31/3/15 he was arrested alongside another employee of the Defendant on allegation of conspiracy to steal and stealing of some jewelries and cash belonging to a guest of his employer; that his salary for the month of March 2015 was not paid; that he was charged to Court on 7/4/15 and discharged for want of diligent prosecution and that he resigned his employment with the Defendant via a letter dated 22/3/16 and demanded for the payment of his outstanding salaries from March 2015 to March 2016 together with his terminal entitlements. The position of the Defendant is that the Claimant resigned from his employment without a month's notice or payment of a month's salary as required by his letter of employment. The reliefs sought by the Claimant are as follows - 1. The sum of =N=467,500 (Four Hundred and Sixty-Seven Thousand, Five Hundred Naira only) being accumulated arrears of salary and leave allowance due with effect from March 2015 to March 2016. 2.The sum of =N=595,000 (Five Hundred and Ninety- Five Thousand Naira only) being accumulated arrears of benefit/entitlement and pension due with effect from April 2008 to March 2016 with interest thereon at the rate of 21% per annum. 3. Cost of this action including Solicitor fee in sum of =N=500,000.00 (Five Hundred Thousand Naira only). 13. The claim by the Claimant for payment of his arrears of salary and accumulated leave allowances must necessarily be predicated upon having worked as an employee of the Defendant during the period in question. Claimant did not inform the Court that he rendered any service to the Defendant between 31/3/15 and 31/3/16. Indeed, while being cross examined, the Claimant in response to a question informed the Court that between the time he was arrested and the date of his resignation he did not go to work for Defendant. There is evidence before me that Claimant was arrested on 31/3/15 and that he resigned by Exh. C3 dated 22/3/16. The law is trite that the Court will not order payment of salaries for services not rendered. An employee is entitled to wages and salaries/allowances during the period of his or her lawful engagement in service. No employer is under any obligation to pay salaries/wages/allowances to an employee who has not worked for the period of his employment. For example, a dismissed employee can only claim emoluments he had worked for in the course of his employment. See Olatunbosun v. NISER (1988) 3 NWLR (Pt. 80) 25 at 55-56 and N.M.B. v. Adewunmi (1972) 11 SC 111 at 117. What the Claimant is entitled to is his emolument for the period he actually worked for the employer. See Adekunle v. W.R.F.C (1963) W.R.N.L.R 6 at 11. I find the claim for accumulated salaries and leave allowances not proved. I dismiss same accordingly. 14. The second relief is for the sum of =N=595,000 (Five Hundred and Ninety- Five Thousand Naira only) being accumulated arrears of benefit/entitlement and pension due with effect from April 2008 to March 2016 with interest thereon at the rate of 21% per annum. Again as respecting the first relief sought, it is incumbent on the Claimant to adduce sufficiently cogent and credible evidence in support of his claim. Under this head of claim, the Claimant is seeking both accumulated arrears of benefit/entitlement and pension both in the sum of =N=595,000.00. This claim is for a sum certain. It is akin to a claim for special damages which must be specially pleaded and strictly proved. See Ogbonna v. Ogbonna (2014) LPELR-22308 (CA). How much of the =N=595,000.00 is the accumulated arrears of benefit/entitlement? How much of the sum claimed is also for pension due? I have no answer to either of these questions. Perhaps the Claimant would want the Court to speculate respecting his claim and apportion the sum as may be appropriate. However, speculation is not in the realms of the responsibility of the Judex. For, any justice predicated on speculation has potential to cause injustice. As Uwaifor JSC aptly noted in Ivienagbor v. Osato Bazuaye & Anor. (1999)6 S.C (Pt. 1) 149 ''Speculation is not an aspect of inference that may be drawn from facts that are laid before the Court. Inference is a reasonable deduction from facts whereas speculation is a mere variant of imaginative guess which, even when it appears plausible, should never be allowed by a Court of law to fill any hiatus in the evidence before it''. See also Overseas Construction Co. Limited v. Creek Enterprise Limited (1965)16 NSCC (Pt. 2) 1371 at 1375. There being no proof of this second head of claim, I have no hesitation in dismissing it accordingly. The third relief is for cost of action including Solicitor's fee. It is a subsidiary relief being predicated on the success of the main reliefs. Now, the 2 main reliefs having failed, the claim for cost of action and Solicitor's fees must equally fail. I dismiss the suit of the Claimant in its entirety for lack of proof by cogent and credible evidence. 15. The second issue for determination is whether the Defendant is entitled to its counter claims. The counter claim as sought by the Defendant/counter claimant is for the sum of =N=25,000.00 from the Claimant/Defendant to counter claim for failing to give a month's notice of resignation. The law is trite that a counter claim is a separate and independent suit of its own. See Usman v. Garke (2003) 14 NWLR (Pt.840)261. Thus, the counter claim as sought by the Defendant/counter claimant is for the sum of =N=25,000.00 from the Claimant/Defendant to counter claim for failing to give a month's notice of resignation. Counter claimant is obliged to lead and adduce credible evidence in proof of same if it is to be granted by the Court. In proof of its counter claim, the Defendant/Counter claimant tendered Exh. D2 a letter dated 1/4/08 and titled Pre: Provisional Offer of Employment. In its 5th paragraph, the exhibit states thus - ''Upon confirmation of your employment, the company may for reasons best known to it terminate your employment with one months(sic) notice in writing or payment of one month salary in lieu of notice. Should you decide to withdraw your services after confirmation, you are required to give one months(sic) notice in writing or pay one month salary in lieu to the company''. 16. The Claimant is obliged by his contractual terms to give a month's notice or a month's salary in lieu of such notice in event of resignation. I have carefully perused the pleadings of the parties in this case. None of the parties alluded to the fact of confirmation of employment. The Claimant did not inform the Court that his employment was confirmed. In much the same vein, the Defendant/Counter claimant did not prove the fact of the employment of the Claimant having been confirmed which would have made a month's notice or payment of a month's salary in lieu inevitable. I find and hold that the counter claim sought is not proved as required by law. I therefore refuse and dismiss same. 17. Finally, for the avoidance of doubt and for all the reasons as contained in this Judgment, I dismiss the entire case of the Claimant for lack of proof. In like manner and for lack of proof by cogent evidence, I dismiss the counter claims of the Defendant/Counter claimant. 18. Judgment is entered accordingly. ____________________ Hon. Justice J. D. Peters Presiding Judge