Download PDF
JUDGMENT The Claimant commenced this action on 27th April 2018 vide the Originating Summons process. In a ruling of this court delivered on 10th October 2018, the suit was converted to one initiated by Compliant and the parties were ordered to file pleadings. Pursuant to the order of court, the Claimant filed a statement of facts on 22nd October 2018 wherein he sought the following claims against the Defendant: 1. A Declaration by the Honourable Court that the failure, neglect and/or deliberate refusal of the Defendant to fully Comply with the provision of paragraph (b) of the compromise or settlement agreement between the parties is a breach of the contract entered into by the parties. 2. An Order of this Honourable Court commanding the respondent to pay the sum of N84,989,982.38k (Eighty-Four Million, Nine Hundred and Eighty Nine Thousand, Nine Hundred and Eighty-Two Naira, Thirty-Eight Kobo) only, being 50% salary, allowances and entitlements arrears from 1st October, 2014 to 2nd October, 2017. 3. An Order of this Honourable Court commanding the respondent to pay 10% interest of the judgment sum per annum until the judgment sum is liquidated. 4. And further sum of N10,000,000.00 (Ten Million Naira) only as cost of this suit. Upon the close of pleadings, hearing commenced on the 4th day of March 2019. The Claimant testified for himself as CW1. The Defendant did not call any witness, as counsel for the defence informed the court that the Defendant will rest its case on the case of the Claimant. Subsequent intervening applications were taken and resolved and final written addresses were filed in accordance with court rules. These were duly adopted on the 12th day of July 2019. CLAIMANT’S CASE In proof of these claims, the Claimant gave evidence on 4th March 2019 and tendered some documents in evidence. The case of the Claimant is that he was appointed the Managing Director/CEO of the Defendant in a contract of service and letter of appointment dated 18th May 2011. He submitted a resignation letter dated 1st October 2014 but the resignation became effective on 3rd October 2017 when it was accepted by the Defendant. He instituted a suit in court against the Defendant for the allegations levied against him to justify his forceful resignation. The parties however settled the matter in an agreement entered into on 3rd October 2017. The Claimant performed his own obligation under the agreement but the Defendant failed to perform its own part of the agreement. The Defendant paid him the sum of N10,000,000 only, as representing the full and final payment of 50% of his entitlements which he was entitled to be paid in the agreement. Although he collected the cheque for the amount as part payment, he also wrote letters to demand for the balance. His solicitors also wrote a letter to the Defendant with an accurate computation based on the effective date of his resignation being 3rd October 2017. On 28th March 2018, the Defendant replied that it has fully discharged the payment of his entitlements in accordance with the terms of the agreement. The computation he sent to the Defendant is based on standard records available to the Defendant as to how the outstanding sum of N84,989,982.38 was arrived at. The money owed to him by the Defendant was a liquidated sum which was never in dispute. The parties have agreed to 50% of arrears of salaries, allowances and entitlements. He has suffered lots of psychological, social and financial loss as a result of the Defendant’s breach of agreement. As soon as the Claimant closed his case, the Defendant’s counsel informed the court that the Defendant will rest its case on the case of the Claimant. CLAIMANT’S ADDRESS The Claimant in his final written address formulated the following issues for determination: 1. Whether the Respondents were in breach of their compromise agreement with the Claimant by paying him N10,000,000 (Ten Million Naira) only which does not represent the 50% of his severance entitlements as shown by his contract of service. 2. Whether the payment of the sum of N10,000,000 (Ten Million Naira) only by the Respondent constituted an ACCORD AND SATISFACTION of the full and final settlement of the Claimant’s remuneration at 50% as agreed in paragraph (b) of the parties’ agreement dated 3rd October 2017 3. Whether the courts are bound to interpret and enforce the contract between parties or/and whether a party to an agreement can unilaterally waive or vary terms of agreement without mutual consent 4. Whether the Claimant as a labourer is entitled to his wage, being the sum of N84,989,982.38k Eighty-Four Million, Nine Hundred and Eighty-Nine Thousand, Nine Hundred and Eighty-Two Naira, Thirty-Eight Kobo only, being the 50% salary allowances and entitlements arrears from 1st October 2014 to 2nd October 2017. 5. Whether the onus is on the Respondent to refute Exhibit 11 which deductions was derived from Exhibit C1, which is the condition and terms of employment 6. Whether by the refusal of the Respondent not to produce documents duly put to it on notice, they are in breach of Section 159 of the Evidence Act which is withholding of Evidence and whether it amounted to denying the Claimant fair hearing by not allowing the subpoenaed witness to testify. Seeking to argue Issues One and Two together, learned counsel for the Claimant submitted that there was no accord between the Claimant and the Defendant and that there is no satisfaction, as the Defendant acted unilaterally without the mutual consent of the Claimant. See DABOUL LTD vs. MAJEKODUNMI (2012) 4LCC Pg. 512 RATIO 1. In addition, counsel submitted that the debt is a liquidated money demand which cannot be discharged by the payment of a lesser sum without the parties mutually in agreement. Counsel further submitted that the Defendant never contradicted the Claimants claims for his actual entitlement. On Issue Three, the Claimant’s counsel submitted that the Defendant in the case has no legal right to unilaterally vary an agreement it entered into with the Claimant or resile same without the consent of the Claimant. See DENNIS NWOYE OKAFOR vs. ANTHONY IGWITO & 2 ORS (1997) 11 NWLR (Pt. 527) 36. Counsel submitted in addition that the failure or deliberate refusal of the Defendant in this case to obey the terms of his agreement with the Claimant dated 3rd of October 2017 is a breach of contract and unacceptable to law. On Issue 4, counsel submitted that the Claimant is entitled to his wages and by virtue of paragraph (b) of the settlement agreement between the parties dated the 3rd of October 2017 the Claimant is entitled to his arrears of salaries, allowances and entitlements as a former Managing Director and Chief Executive Officer of the Defendant Company. On Issue 5, the Claimant counsel submitted that the onus shifted to the Defendant to prove whether Exhibit 11 was wrong or right as they did not object to the Document being tendered in evidence. See KATE ENTREPRISES LIMITED vs. DAEWOO NIGERIA LTD (1985) 7 SC 1. Counsel submitted that both exhibits were pleaded by the Claimant in paragraphs 3 and 20 of their statement of claim and duly admitted in evidence unchallenged. Counsel added that the absence of evidence to support the statement of defence of the Defendant presupposes that the pleadings of the Defendant have been abandoned. See OKECHUKWU vs. OKAFOR (1961) 2 SCNLR Pg. 369. On Issue 6, it was the submission of the Claimants counsel that the failure of the Defendant not to produce the documents which they were already put on notice to produce amounts to withholding of evidence contrary to Section 159 of the Evidence Act. See ADEDEJI vs. KOLAWOLE (2004) All FWLR (Pt. 214) 91 at Pg. 108 PARA C-D RATIO 6. Counsel added that the failure to allow the subpoenaed witness to testify in the matter amounted to denial of fair hearing. In conclusion, counsel emphasized that the case of the Claimant is not a claim for damages but of demand of wages for labour and urged the court to give judgement in favour of the Claimant either by granting the reliefs sought or to direct the Registrar of the court to conduct an inquiry between the parties in order to ascertain the entitlements of the Claimant in the interest of justice. DEFENDANT’S ADDRESS The Defendant in his final written address submitted the following issue for determination: Whether the Claimant has proved his case before this court to attract the award of his claims notwithstanding the fact that the Defendant did not call any witness. On Issue One, learned counsel for the Defendant submitted that the calculation tendered in Exhibit C11 goes to no issue as the claim for the sum of N84,989,982.38k less N10,000,000 was not specifically proved. See UBN vs. IRONBAR (2011) All FWLR Pt. 573 at 2021 and Order 30 of the Rules of the court. Counsel emphasized that the parties are bound by Exhibit C4 and argued that the Claimant has not shown the court that the N10,000,000 paid to him is not the 50% of his terminal benefit. See ADEMOLA OLUBANWO vs. BOC GASES NIG PLC NICN/OW/102/2014. Counsel contended that the Claimant did not specifically plead the special damages he claimed from the court. Counsel urged the court to dismiss all the claims of the Claimant. Further arguments and authorities proffered by counsels were duly reviewed and evaluated. Necessary reference will be made to them in the course of this judgment. COURT DECISION The Defendant, although filed a statement of defence on 29th November 2018, did not call evidence in this case. The only evidence to consider in determining this case is that adduced by the Claimant. In any case, the burden of proof of the claims in the case is on the Claimant. Therefore, the duty of this court in the circumstance is to examine the evidence adduced by the Claimant to see if he has been able to prove the reliefs sought by him. The case of the Claimant and the reliefs sought by him are founded on the terms of an agreement executed between the Claimant and the Defendant on 3rd October 2017. This is Exhibit C4. According to the Claimant, one of the terms of the agreement is that he will be paid 50% of his salary, allowances and entitlements arrears from 1st October 2014 to 2nd October, 2017 but the Defendant paid him only N10,000,000 as full and final payment of the 50% of his entitlements he ought to be paid under the agreement. The Claimant contended that 50% of his salary, allowances and entitlements arrears from 1st October 2014 to 2nd October, 2017 amounted to the sum of N84,989,982.38k and this is the amount he ought to be paid based on the agreement. Hence, he claims the sum of N84,989,982.38k in relief 2 of his claims. The fact that the parties entered into the agreement dated 3rd October 2017 is not in dispute. The Claimant based his claim in this case on the term of the agreement in paragraph (b) of page 3 of Exhibit C4. The agreement of the parties in the paragraph is that the Defendant shall pay to the Claimant 50% of his entitlements, benefits, severance package less his liabilities to the Defendant. The claim of the Claimant founded on this term of the agreement is this: the sum of N84,989,982.38k only, being 50% salary, allowances and entitlements arrears from 1st October 2014 to 2nd October, 2017. It is observed from the term of the agreement relied on by the Claimant that the specific items upon which the Claimant is to be paid 50% are entitlements, benefits and severance package. The Claimant however expanded his claim to cover salaries, allowances and entitlements arrears. Also, the agreement did not mention period of computation. The Claimant decided to compute from 1st October, 2014 to 2nd October, 2017. Importantly, the agreement did not state what constitute the entitlements, benefits and severance package of the Claimant. It did not also mention the total amount the Claimant is entitled to be paid as entitlements, benefits and severance package or the 50% of the amount. Written agreement freely entered into by the parties is binding on them. None of the parties can unilaterally alter or vary the terms of such agreement. The courts are also expected to respect the sanctity of the agreements reached by parties and must not make a contract for them or rewrite the one they have already made themselves. In other words, courts cannot read into a contract, terms which are not there in the agreement. See SEGUN BABATUNDE vs. BANK OF THE NORTH LIMITED: LER [2011] SC. 350A/2002; BAKER MARINE NIGERIA LIMITED vs. CHEVRON NIGERIA LIMITED [2006] 6 S.C. 21. It is clear to me that the items of entitlements constituting the claim of the Claimant and the amount claimed by him are not supported by the term of the agreement he relied on. The Claimant has alleged nonetheless that 50% agreed to be paid to him in paragraph (b) of page 3 of Exhibit C4 comes to the sum of N84,989,982.38k less N10,000,000 already paid to him. He consequently claims payment of the sum N84,989,982.38k as 50% of his salary, allowances and entitlements arrears from 1st October, 2014 to 2nd October, 2017. The Claimant did not show any document where, either before or after the agreement in Exhibit C4, the parties agreed on the total sum which constitutes 50% of the Claimant’s entitlements, benefits, severance package. Therefore, to succeed in his claim, the Claimant is expected to plead and prove the agreed total amount of his salary, allowances and entitlements arrears from 1st October 2014 to 2nd October 2017 and then plead and prove what 50% of the sum is. The Claimant did not mention anywhere in his pleading or evidence what was the total amount of salary, allowances and entitlements arrears from 1st October 2014 to 2nd October 2017 he was entitled to be paid. He did not also show anywhere in his pleading or evidence what is 50% of the salary, allowances and entitlements arrears from 1st October 2014 to 2nd October 2017 or how the 50% was to be arrived at or computed. In paragraph 20 of the Claimant’s amended statement of fact, he referred to a computation he sent to the Defendant wherein he computed the sum of N84,989,982.38 to be 50% of his salary, allowances and entitlements arrears from 1st October 2014 to 2nd October 2017. This document is Exhibit C11. The document is not signed by anybody. Where a document is not signed, it has no origin in terms of its maker has no evidential value in law. Such a document is worthless and void and ought not to be admitted in evidence but where it is admitted in evidence, the court should not attach any probative value to it. See OMEGA BANK NIGERIA PLC vs. O. B. C. LIMITED LER [2005] S.C. 77/2002 at 14; G.S. & O. IND. LTD vs. NAFDAC (2012) 5 NWLR (Pt. 1294) 511 at 536; AMIZU vs. NZERIBE (1989) 4 NWLR (Pt.118) 755; A. G. ABIA STATE vs. AGBARANYA (1999) 6 NWLR (Pt. 607) 362 at 371. It is also observed that the facts and computation in Exhibit C11 have not been pleaded by the Claimant. The document is not in proof of facts which have been pleaded by the Claimant. The document has no evidential value and goes to no issue. There is no other evidence adduced by the Claimant to show that 50% of his salary, allowances and entitlements arrears from 1st October 2014 to 2nd October 2017 is the sum of N84,989,982.38. The Claimant has not pleaded the facts which will enable him to succeed in this case. He has also not adduced acceptable and sufficient evidence in proof of his claims. Besides these defects, I find also that the Claimant’s claim for the sum of N84,989,982.38 as 50% of his salary, allowances and entitlements arrears from 1st October 2014 to 2nd October 2017 is not supported by the term of the agreement he relied on to found the claim. The Claimant has failed to prove his case. The case fails completely and it is hereby dismissed. No order as to cost. Judgment is entered accordingly. Hon. Justice O. Y. Anuwe Judge