Download PDF
JUDGMENT This action was commenced by way of Complaint dated and filed on the 20th day of October 2016. In her amended statement of facts filed on 22nd June 2018, the Claimant claims the following reliefs against the Defendant- 1. A Declaration that the refusal, failure or neglect of the Defendant to release the full and total severance payment due to the Claimant after her resignation from the Defendant’s employment is wrongful, unlawful, illegal, malafide and without just cause. 2. An Order of court directing the Defendant to pay the sum of N514,165.00 to the Claimant as the balance of the full and total severance payment due to the Claimant from the Defendant being her outstanding salaries for the months of June 2016, July 2016 and 18 days that she worked for the Defendant in August 2016. 3. An Order of court directing the Defendant to pay the sum of N5,000,000 to the Claimant as general damages for the pain, trauma, inconveniences and financial distress which the Claimant has experienced due to the illegal, wrongful and unjustified actions of the Defendant. 4. 10% interest from the date of judgment till final liquidation of the judgment sum. 5. Cost of action. In proof of the claims, the Claimant testified on 17th July 2018 and 27th November 2018. It is her evidence that she was employed by the Defendant on 2nd November 2015 as the Editor of a fashion magazine called Urban Fashionista Magazine. Her monthly salary was the sum of N250,000. While working for the Defendant, she noticed that her salaries were being delayed from March 2016. Although she was eventually paid her salaries for the months of April and May 2016, her salaries for June and July 2016 was not paid at all. She submitted her letter of resignation to the Defendant on 4th August 2016 but worked till 18th August 2016 being her last day at work. On 22nd August 2016, she phoned the Defendant’s Managing Director and he promised that her salaries for June, July and up to 18th August 2016 will be paid to her on or before 24th August 2016. On 26th August 2016, however, she received an email from the Defendant’s HOD HR wherein the Defendant backdated the Claimant’s attendance to work to April 2016. From the Defendant’s record, the Defendant deducted the sum of N514,165.00 from her total severance package of N637,096.00 leaving her with only the sum of N122,930. She rejected the amount the Defendant proposed to pay her as severance and communicated so to the Defendant’s HOD HR. She did not hear any response from the Defendant with regard to payment of her outstanding salaries. Her outstanding salaries for the month of June, July and up to 18th August 2016 is the sum of N637,096.00. On 22nd November 2017 this court entered judgment in her favour for the sum of N122,930.00 admitted by the Defendant. The outstanding balance is the sum of N514,165.00 which has not been paid to her. The Claimant further said she suffered hardships, damages and losses from the conduct of the Defendant. In support of her case, the Claimant tendered three documents in evidence. They are Exhibits A, B and C. The Claimant was not cross examined by the Defendant. The Claimant was to be cross examined on 23rd January 2019 and one Christabel Ayuk who appeared for the Defendant requested for adjournment because she was ill-equipped to cross-examine the claimant. The case was adjourned at the instance to the Defendant to 3rd April 2019 for cross-examination of the Claimant. On that day however the Defendant’s counsel did not appear and there was no explanation of any kind given to the court as to the reason for the absence of the Defendant’s counsel. Upon the application of learned counsel for the Claimant, an order was made foreclosing the Defendant from the cross examination of the Claimant. The case was thereafter adjourned to 16th May 2019 for defence and hearing notice was ordered to be served on the Defendant. The defendant filed an amended statement of defence and counter claim on 25th January 2019 but did not call evidence in this suit. On 16th May 2019, one I. E. Inyang Esq., appeared for the Defendant and sought for adjournment to enable parties explore settlement. The suit was adjourned to 2nd July 2019 for report of settlement. The court did not sit on the matter again until 14th October 2019. Only counsel for the Claimant was in court. The case was adjourned to 29th October 2019 for defence and hearing notice was ordered to be served on the Defendant. Proof of service in the file of this case shows that on 25th October 2019, the Defendant’s counsel was served hearing notice but still did not appear on 29th October 2019 to enter defence. This court, having been satisfied that the Defendant is not ready to defend the suit in view of its disregard of the hearing notice served, was constrained to foreclose the Defendant from defending the suit. When this matter came up for adoption of final written addresses on 18th December 2019, the Defendant’s counsel was also not in court and did not file the Defendant’s final written address. CLAIMANT’S FINAL ADDRESS In the Claimants final written address, learned counsel for the Claimant formulated the following issue for determination: Whether or not from the totality of the evidence led at the trial, the Claimant is entitled to the reliefs sought in her Statement of Facts. In arguing the above issue, Counsel set out the reliefs sought by the Claimant and argued them seriatim. On Relief One, it was the submission of learned counsel for the Claimant that there was no justifiable cause for the deduction and withholding of the Claimant’s salaries by the Defendant. According to counsel, a critical examination of Exhibit C reveals that the Claimant was duly present at her office for the period contrary to the Defendants allegations that she was absent from duty for the months of April, May, June, July and August, 2016. Counsel added that the Defendant did not present any attendance record to challenge, counter or contradict Exhibit C and submitted that the law is clear that unchallenged or uncontroverted evidence is deemed admitted. Counsel referred to the case of G. S. PASCUTTO (TRADING AS COM-EST) vs. ADECENTRO NIG. LTD (1997) 11 NWLR (Pt. 529) 467 Counsel further argued that the Defendant abandoned its Defence; therefore, all the facts pleaded in the Defendant’s Statement of Defence and Counterclaim without any evidence to support it during trial goes to no issue and must be resolved against the Defendant. See the case of AJAO vs. ADEMOLA (2005) NWLR (Pt. 913) 636 at 663, Paras. C-E. On Relief Two, counsel referred the court to Exhibit B and submitted that this relief flows from Relief 1 above. Counsel argued that the Defendant did not prove to the Court how it arrived at the computation and deduction of the Claimant’s salaries to the sum of N514,165.00. In addition, counsel argued that there is nothing before the Court to justify these fraudulent deductions which is geared towards depriving the Claimant of her rightful wages. Furthermore, the Claimant rejected the Defendant’s wrong calculation vide a mail sent on 28/08/2016 (Exhibit B) and in the said mail, the Claimant demanded for the payment of her outstanding salaries totalling N637,096.00. Counsel submitted that the Defendant’s failure to respond to the mail correspondence and to deny any statement against its interest will be treated as an admission of the statements contained in the mail correspondence. See TRADE BANK PLC vs. CHAMI (2003) 13 NWLR (Pt. 836) 158. Counsel urged the court to find that the Claimant is entitled to the payment of her full and total severance payment in the sum of N514,165.00. On Relief Three, counsel for the Claimant submitted that the Claimant is entitled to the relief for general damages as it flows from the wrongful action of the Defendant. Counsel submitted that the Claimant has suffered great hardship, trauma and inconvenience due to the unlawful action of the Defendant and as such is entitled to be compensated by way of damages. In addition, counsel submitted that general damages need not be pleaded nor proved as they flow consequently from the wrongful action of the Defendant. See the case of DIRECT ON PC LTD vs. BINKAM (NIG) LTD (2016) 3 NWLR (Pt. 1498) 50 at PP 68-69, Paras A-A. Counsel urged the court to so hold and resolve relief 3 in favour of the Claimant COURT’S DECISION The Claimant said in her evidence that she was employed by the Defendant on 2nd November 2015 and she resigned from the employment with effect from 18th August 2016. Her monthly salary in the employment was the sum of N250,000. Her salaries for June 2016, July 2016 and up to 18th August 2016 in the sum of N637,096 were not paid to her. On 22nd November 2017 this court entered judgment in her favour for the sum of N122,930.00 admitted by the Defendant. The outstanding balance is the sum of N514,165.00 which has not been paid to her. The Claimant further said she suffered hardships, damages and losses from the conduct of the Defendant. The Defendant failed to defend the claims of the Claimant. The facts pleaded by the Claimant and evidence adduced by her were not controverted or disputed by the Defendant. The effect is that the claim of the Claimant is proved. See IYERE vs. BENDEL FEEDS AND FLOUR MILL LTD (2009) All FWLR (Pt. 453) 1217 at 1247; OYENIYI vs. ADELEKE (2009) All FWLR (Pt. 476) 1902 at 1922; KYARI vs. ALKALI (2001) FWLR (Pt. 60) 1481; ASAFA FOODS FACTORY LTD vs. ALRAINE NIG. LTD. (2002) FWLR (Pt. 125) 756. The law is also settled that where a Defendant is given opportunity to defend a suit but he fails to utilize the opportunity, the Defendant is deemed to have admitted the claims of the Claimant. See TEMILE vs. AWANI (2001) FWLR (Pt. 62) 1937 at 1953. In the absence of any defence to the case of the Claimant, the onus of proof on the Claimant in this case is discharged. In addition to the fact that the Claimant’s suit is not defended, I find merit in the case presented by the Claimant. The Claimant has succeeded in proving her claims. Accordingly, reliefs 1 and 2 sought by the Claimant are granted as prayed. The Defendant is ordered to pay the sum of N514,165.00 to the Claimant being her outstanding salaries for the months of June 2016, July 2016 and 18 days she worked for the Defendant in the month of August 2016. As for reliefs 3 and 5, the sum of N1,000,000.00 is awarded as general damages and the sum of N100,000.00 as cost respectively. The Defendant is ordered to pay these sums to the Claimant within 30 days from today. In default, the sums will thereafter attract 10% interest per annum until the sums are fully paid to the Claimant. The Defendant did not adduce evidence to prove its counter claim. Since the counter claim is not proved, it is accordingly dismissed. Judgment is entered accordingly. Hon. Justice O. Y. Anuwe Judge