Download PDF
<p class="MsoNoSpacing"><b><u><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-language:HE">Representation</span></u></b><b><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-bidi-language:HE">:<o:p></o:p></span></b></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-bidi-language:HE">Bashir Ibrahim for the 1<sup>st</sup>, 2<sup>nd</sup> and 3<sup>rd</sup> Defendants/Applicants<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-bidi-language:HE">R. C. Dike, Senior State Counsel, for the 4<sup>th</sup> Defendant<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-bidi-language:HE">Kelvin Emeka Okoro for the Claimant<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" align="center" style="text-align:center"><b><u><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-language: HE">JUDGMENT/RULING</span></u></b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-language:HE"> <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-language:HE">On the 2<sup>nd</sup> day of January 2015, the Claimant commenced this action by way of Complaint, wherein he claimed against the Defendants jointly and severally, the following reliefs:<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.75in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in;mso-list:l3 level1 lfo4"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-size: 12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-language:HE">i)<span style="font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-bidi-language:HE">A Declaration that the Defendants were under an obligation to set up a panel of summary <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-language: HE">investigation to investigate the Claimant’s alleged offence and recommend him for appropriate punishment or review same or reject same before the Claimant is issued punishment notice and/or eventual termination of appointment.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.75in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in;mso-list:l3 level1 lfo4"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-size: 12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-language:HE">ii)<span style="font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-bidi-language:HE">A Declaration that the letter of 3<sup>rd</sup> March 2010 purportedly terminating the Claimant’s <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-language: HE">appointment without subjecting him to the summary investigation of the Chairman/Chief Executive or any other delegated body is invalid, null and void.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.75in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in;mso-list:l3 level1 lfo4"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-size: 12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-language:HE">iii)<span style="font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-bidi-language:HE">A Declaration that the Claimant is still in the service of the Defendants having not been <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.25in;text-align:justify;text-indent: .25in"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-bidi-language:HE">lawfully disengaged from service.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.75in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in;mso-list:l3 level1 lfo4"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-size: 12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-language:HE">iv)<span style="font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-bidi-language:HE">An Order directing the Defendants to reinstate the Claimant to his appointment as the <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.25in;text-align:justify;text-indent: .25in"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-bidi-language:HE">Superintendent of Narcotics of the 1<sup>st</sup> Defendant.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.75in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in;mso-list:l3 level1 lfo4"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-size: 12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-language:HE">v)<span style="font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-bidi-language:HE">An Order directing the Defendants to pay to the Claimant all his entitlements till judgment is <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.25in;text-align:justify;text-indent: .25in"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-bidi-language:HE">delivered in this suit.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.75in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in;mso-list:l3 level1 lfo4"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-size: 12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-language:HE">vi)<span style="font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-bidi-language:HE">An Order directing the Defendants to reinstate the Claimant to his legitimate rank without any <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.25in;text-align:justify;text-indent: .25in"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-bidi-language:HE">loss of promotions and privileges.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.75in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in;mso-list:l3 level1 lfo4"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-size: 12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-language:HE">vii)<span style="font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-bidi-language:HE">A Perpetual Injunction restraining the Defendants from further interference with the <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.25in;text-align:justify;text-indent: .25in"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-bidi-language:HE">Claimant’s employment without lawful justification.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-language:HE">By a Motion on Notice filed on the 9<sup>th</sup> day of May 2014, and brought pursuant to Order 11 Rule 2(1) of the National Industrial Court Act 2007, Section 2(a) of the Public Officers Protection Act Cap P41 LFN and under the inherent jurisdiction of this Honourable Court, counsel for the 1<sup>st</sup>, 2<sup>nd</sup> and 3<sup>rd</sup> Defendants sought the following prayers: <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.25in;mso-list:l2 level1 lfo2"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-size: 12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-language:HE">1.<span style="font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-bidi-language:HE">AN ORDER setting down for hearing, the preliminary objection to the effect that <br> the Claimant's action is statute barred in accordance with the Public Officers <br> Protection Act Cap P41 Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 2004.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.25in;mso-list:l2 level1 lfo2"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-size: 12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-language:HE">2.<span style="font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-font-width:91%;mso-bidi-language:HE"> </span><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-language:HE">AN ORDER dismissing this Suit on the ground that it is statute barred. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-language:HE">The grounds upon which this application is brought in addition to those contained in the accompanying Affidavit are as follows: <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo1"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-size: 12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-font-width:80%;mso-bidi-language:HE">(i)<span style="font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-bidi-language:HE">The Honourable Court lacks jurisdiction to entertain this suit because it was filed <br> outside three (3) months from the date of termination of appointment. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-language:HE">(ii) The court lacks jurisdiction to entertain this suit having regard to the true and <br> proper meaning and intendment of Section 2(a) of the Public Officers Protection <br> Act Cap P41 Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 2004. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-language:HE">(iii) The instant suit is incompetent and therefore ought to be dismissed. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:4.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-language:HE"> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-language:HE">The motion is supported by a 5-paragraph Affidavit deposed to by Peter Akalonu. In the accompanying address, counsel distilled one issue for determination, which is: <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify"><b><i><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-language: HE">Whether the Claimant's suit filed 3 (three) years and 10 (ten) months after the termination of his appointment is not statute barred by virtue of Section 2(a) of the Public Officers Protection Act, Cap P41 Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004. <u><o:p></o:p></u></span></i></b></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-language:HE">In arguing this issue, counsel argued that the 1<sup>st</sup> Defendant is a public office established by an Act of the National Assembly by virtue of Section 1 and 2 of the National Drug Law Enforcement Agency Act, Cap N30 LFN 2004. He cited the case of </span><b><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-language:HE">THE REGISTERED TRUSTEES OF THE PLANNED PARENTHOOD FEDERATION OF NIGERIA & ANOTHER vs. DR. ABDULKADIR BABATUNDE SULAIMON (2004) 11 NWLR (Pt. 883) 1 at 20 para. E - G</span></b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-language: HE"> where public office was defined to be one “created by the Constitution, statute or other enabling legislation. Secondly, that its functions, duties and powers are defined by law and other regulation; and thirdly, that the position must show some permanency…” counsel further argued that from this definition and the enabling statute referred to above, it is safe to say that the 1<sup>st</sup> Defendant is a public office. See also the case of </span><b><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-language: HE">AKEEM vs. UNIBADAN (2003) 10 NWLR (Pt. 829) 584 at 596.</span></b><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-bidi-language:HE"> <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:4.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-language:HE"> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-language:HE">Counsel further argued that the Claimant is also claiming against the action of the 2<sup>nd</sup> and 3<sup>rd </sup>Defendants who are officers of the 1<sup>st</sup> Defendant. From the pleadings before the Court, the cause of action was the termination of appointment of the Claimant. It is clear that the Claimant's termination letter was dated 3<sup>rd</sup> March, 2010 but with effect from 2<sup>nd</sup> March, 2010 which was the date of commencement of the punishment. The role the 2<sup>nd</sup> and 3<sup>rd</sup> Defendants played in the termination of the appointment of the Claimant was in the discharge of their duties as assigned to them in Section 3 of the NDLEA Act Cap N30 LFN, 2004. The court was referred to </span><b><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-language: HE">KASANDUBU vs. ULTIMATE PETROLEUM LTD (2008) All FWLR 155 at 182 paragraphs B-D</span></b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-language: HE">, where the Court of Appeal held as follows:<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify"><i><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-language:HE">“under the provision of Section 2 of the Public Officers Protection Act, which is in pari materia with the Public Officers Law of Kwara State, any action or prosecution or other proceedings commenced outside the three months period is totally barred as the right of the injured person to commence the action, prosecution or proceeding has been extinguished by the law. Indeed, at that stage the person has no cause of action. Thus, whether an act complained against a public officer was done in the execution of a public duty can only be canvassed where there is a cause of action i.e. where the action is instituted within three months” <o:p></o:p></span></i></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-language:HE">In the instant case, counsel contended that the present action was commenced after the three months period, thus this action is incompetent and should be dismissed. Counsel submitted that the acts complained of against the Defendants were lawfully done in the execution of their duties and are empowered to do so. See also </span><b><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-font-width:105%; mso-bidi-language:HE">NAU AWKA vs. NWEKE (2008) 1 NWLR (Pt. 1069) at 504</span></b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-font-width: 105%;mso-bidi-language:HE">. </span><i><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-language: HE"><o:p></o:p></span></i></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-font-width:105%;mso-bidi-language: HE">Counsel further contended that Section 2 of Public Officers Protection Act has been interpreted to include both artificial and natural persons. It has also been held in </span><b><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-font-width:105%;mso-bidi-language: HE">UNILORIN vs. ADENIRAN (2007) 6 NWLR (Pt. 1031) 498 at 521–522</span></b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-font-width: 105%;mso-bidi-language:HE"> that where an Act prescribes the period for instituting an action proceedings cannot be instituted after that period. See<b> </b>also the Supreme Court decision in </span><b><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-font-width:105%;mso-bidi-language:HE">OSUN STATE GOVERNMENT vs. DALAMI (2009) 9 NWLR (Pt. 1038) page 66 </span></b><b><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-font-width:107%;mso-bidi-language: HE">at </span></b><b><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-font-width:105%;mso-bidi-language: HE">81 - 82</span></b><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-font-width:105%;mso-bidi-language:HE">.</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-font-width:105%;mso-bidi-language: HE"> <b><o:p></o:p></b></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-font-width:105%;mso-bidi-language: HE">Furthermore, in determining whether an action is statute barred, counsel argued that the Court is enjoined only to look at the writ of summons and the Statement of Claim alleging when the wrong which gave rise to the Claimant's cause of action was committed and by comparing that date with the date on which the writ of summons was filed. In the present case, the complaint was filed 3 years and 10 months after the termination of the appointment of the Claimant. See the case of </span><b><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-font-width:105%; mso-bidi-language:HE">F.R.N vs. GOLD (2007) 11 NWLR (Pt. 1044) 1 </span></b><b><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-font-width:107%;mso-bidi-language:HE">at </span></b><b><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-font-width:105%; mso-bidi-language:HE">18 paragraphs C-F</span></b><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-font-width:105%;mso-bidi-language: HE">. <b><o:p></o:p></b></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-language:HE">It is counsel’s further argument that where an action is statute barred, the action shall not lie or be instituted. Where it is instituted, the court is robbed of jurisdiction and a trial court should not hear the suit. See the case of </span><b><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-bidi-language:HE">F.R.N. vs. GOLD (supra)</span></b><span style="font-size: 12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-language:HE">. Counsel submitted further that it has been held that at this stage, the Claimant has no cause of action. Any remedy granted will be consequently unenforceable in law. See also the case of </span><b><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-language:HE">FAJIMOLU vs. UNILORIN (2007) 2 NWLR (Pt. 1017) 74 at 89</span></b><span style="font-size: 12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-language:HE">. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-language:HE">Again, counsel submitted that the issue of "intervening acts" will not even avail the Claimant in this case. He submitted further that in the event that there are intervening acts as the Claimant has claimed in his originating writ, it has been held by the Supreme Court in the case of </span><b><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-language: HE">EBOIGBE vs. N.N.P.C. (1994) 5 NWLR Pt. 665 paragraphs G - H</span></b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-language: HE">, that negotiations between the parties or any such similar act does not stop the time from running. In conclusion, counsel stated that this suit ought to have been commenced "three months next" after the act complained of which in this case, is the termination of the appointment of the Claimant which occurred on the 2<sup>nd</sup> of March, 2010 when the cause of action arose. Counsel submitted that by the Public Officers Protection Act, 2004, the Claimant's action is statute barred. Counsel urged the Court to dismiss this action in limine for being incompetent, statute barred and a gross abuse of the process of this Honourable Court. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing"><span style="font-size:4.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-font-width:105%;mso-bidi-language:HE"> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:2.0in;text-indent:.5in"><b><u><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-language:HE">Court’s Decision<o:p></o:p></span></u></b></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">In paragraph 56 of the statement of defence of the 1<sup>st</sup>, 2<sup>nd</sup> and 3<sup>rd</sup> Defendants, they averred that they shall raise a preliminary objection to the competence of the claimant’s suit on the ground that the suit is statute barred and this court lacks jurisdiction to entertain it. They have now, in their Notice of Preliminary Objection, prayed the court to set the objection down to be heard as a preliminary matter. The Defendants seek a dismissal of the suit on the ground that it is statute barred by virtue the Section 2 (a) of the Public Officers Protection Act. In the affidavit in support of the Notice of Preliminary Objection, it was averred that the Claimant filed this suit against the Defendants on 2<sup>nd</sup> day of January, 2014 while the Claimant’s appointment was terminated on 2<sup>nd </sup>March, 2010 and served on him on 4<sup>th</sup> March, 2010. It was also averred that the Claimant commenced this action against the Defendants outside the three (3) months allowed by law. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;"> </span><span style="font-size: 4pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;"><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">The Claimant did not file a counter affidavit to the </span><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">Notice of Preliminary Objection</span><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">. I have observed however that the Claimant has made elaborate averments in paragraphs 55 to 61 of his amended statement of facts to the effect that his suit is not statute barred. The fact that the Claimant pleaded those facts does not exempt him from responding to the facts in the affidavit in support of the </span><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">Notice of Preliminary Objection</span><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;"> if he intended to oppose the application. As it is, it is deemed that the Claimant is not opposing the </span><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">Notice of Preliminary Objection</span><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;"> and has admitted the facts deposed in the supporting affidavit.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size: 4pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;"> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">Section 2 (a) of POPA canvassed by the Defendants as the basis of their objection </span><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">provides:</span><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;"><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt 1in; text-align: justify; text-indent: -0.5in;"><b><i><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">“2. Where any action, prosecution or other proceeding is commenced against any person for any act done in pursuance or execution or intended execution of any Act or Law or of any public duty or authority, or in respect of any alleged neglect or default in the execution of any such Act, Law, duty or authority, the following provision shall have effect:<o:p></o:p></span></i></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0.0001pt 1.75in; text-align: justify; text-indent: -0.25in;"><!--[if !supportLists]--><b><i><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">(a)<span style="font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span></i></b><!--[endif]--><b><i><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">The action, prosecution or proceeding shall not lie or be instituted unless it is commenced within three months next after the act, neglect or default complained of, or in case of a continuance of damage or injury, within three months next after the ceasing thereof.”<o:p></o:p></span></i></b></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">The effect of the above provision is that an action against a public officer in respect of any act done in pursuance or execution of any Act or law or of public duty or any default in respect of same can only be commenced within 3 months of the accrual of the cause of action except in the case of continuance of the damage or injury in which the claimant must institute the action within 3 months after the cessation of the damage or injury. Where the suit is not commenced within the prescribed period, the claimant’s right of action in respect of that cause will be statute barred and the court will no longer have jurisdiction to entertain the suit. See </span><b><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">IBRAHIM vs. J.S.C, KADUNA STATE (1998) 12 SC 20; EGBE vs. ALHAJI (1990) 3 S.C (Pt.1) 63</span></b><b><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">. <o:p></o:p></span></b></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><b><span style="font-size: 4pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;"> </span></b></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify;tab-stops:269.35pt"><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">The cause of the Claimant’s action, as disclosed in the statement of facts and the reliefs sought by him, was the termination of his employment. The reliefs sought by the Claimant, particularly reliefs (i), (ii) and (iii) of the Complaint, are challenging the termination of his employment. In paragraph 16 of the Claimant’s amended statement of facts, he averred that he received the termination letter on 3<sup>rd</sup> March 2010. That is to say his cause of action arose on 3<sup>rd</sup> March 2010 when he received the letter terminating his employment. The Claimant waited till 2<sup>nd</sup> January 2014 to file this action. Between the time his cause of action arose and the time he filed this suit was a period of 3 years and 9 months. By the description of the Defendants in paragraphs 2, 3, 4 and 5 of the Claimant’s amended statement of facts and by the nature of the Defendants’ statutory and public offices, there is no doubt that that the Defendants are public officers. If the Claimant is to maintain this suit against the Defendant, he ought to have filed the suit within 3 months from the date his cause of action arose. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size: 4pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;"> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">By the effect of Section 2 (a) of POPA, the Claimant’s suit is clearly statute barred having been filed more than a period of 3 months from the time the cause of action arose. It is trite law that suits instituted outside the time stipulated by the statute of limitation is statute barred and cannot be entertained by the courts. Where the law provides for the bringing of an action within a prescribed period of time, proceedings shall not be brought after the time prescribed by the statute. An action brought outside the prescribed period is contrary to the provision of the law and does not give rise to a cause of action. See </span><b><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">ELEBANJO vs. DAWODU (2006) All FWLR (Pt. 328) 604;</span></b><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;"> <b>INEC vs. OKORONKWO (2009) All FWLR (Pt. 488) 227 at 247</b></span><b><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">. </span></b><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">Consequently, this suit is not competent and this court lacks jurisdiction to entertain same. The suit is hereby dismissed. No order as to cost.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size: 4pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;"> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">Ruling is entered accordingly.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;"> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;"> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-align: justify;"><b><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">Hon. Justice O. Y. Anuwe<o:p></o:p></span></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: 0.0001pt; text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">Judge</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p>