Download PDF
<div class="WordSection1"> <p class="MsoNoSpacing"><b><u><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">Representation</span></u></b><b><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">:<o:p></o:p></span></b></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">S. C. Anyaele for the Claimant<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing"><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">S. O. Ndubuisi for the Defendant</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif""><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"">JUDGMENT<o:p></o:p></span></u></b></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">The Claimant instituted this action against the Defendant with a Complaint filed on 19<sup>th</sup> August<span style="color:#515554">, </span>2014 seeking as follows<span style="color:#515554">: </span><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.25in;text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> i. A declaration that the termination of the Claimant<span style="color:#515554">'</span>s contract of employment is unlawful and illegal. <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"">i<span style="color:#515554">i</span>. The payment of the Claimant<span style="color:#515554">'</span>s severance benefits to the tune of <s>N</s>10<span style="color:#515554">,</span>000<span style="color:#515554">,</span>000<span style="color:#515554">.</span>00 (Ten Million Naira) calculated fairly as a Senior Staff of the Defendant. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.25in;text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-font-width: 113%"> iii. </span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">The payment of the Claimant<span style="color:#515554">'</span>s one month salary in lieu of notice as stipulated in the Claimant's letter of termination. <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"">iv. The payment of the sum of <s>N</s>215<span style="color:#6C6F70">,</span>000.00 <span style="color:#515554">(</span>Two Hundred and Fifteen Thousand Naira) being the Claimant<span style="color:#515554">'</span>s year-end bonus for 2013 app<span style="color:#515554">r</span>oved by the Defendant's management. <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"">v. The sum of <s>N</s>5<span style="color:#515554">,</span>000<span style="color:#6C6F70">,</span>000<span style="color:#6C6F70">.</span>00 (Five Million Na<span style="color:#515554">i</span>ra<span style="color:#515554">) </span>as general damages fo<span style="color:#515554">r </span>the loss<span style="color:#515554">, </span>inconvenience and expenditure for breach of contract of employment. <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""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">The complaint was accompanied by the affidavit of verification, statement of facts, claimant’s witness deposition, list of witness and exhibits to be relied on at trial. The defendant entered appearance on 3<sup>rd</sup> October 2014 and filed its statement of defence and counter-claim on the same day. The Defendant subsequently amended its Statement of Defence and Counter-Claim having sought and obtained the leave of the Court.<span style="color:#707578"> </span> Hearing commenced on 10<sup>th</sup> December 2014. The claimant testified for himself as his only witness, while Mr. Aniemeka Umeonyido testified as the defendant’s only witness. Hearing ended on 8<sup>th</sup> October 2015 and parties were ordered to file their Final Written Addresses in accordance with the Rules of this Court. The defendant filed its Final Address on 1<sup>st</sup> December 2015, while the Claimant’s Final Address was filed on 9<sup>th</sup> February 2016. The Defendant subsequently filed its reply on points of Law on 15<sup>th</sup> April 2016. Having both filed their addresses out of time, Counsels on both sides sought and obtained leave of Court, and the Final Written Addresses were adopted on 18<sup>th</sup> April 2016.<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""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">In the Defendant’s final written address filed on 1/12/2015, counsel divided his arguments into two parts, A and B. In PART A<b>, </b>counsel formulated a preliminary legal contention as follows:<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in;mso-text-indent-alt:-.25in;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo3"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman""><span style="font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span>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"">Whether a computer certificate dated 29<sup>th</sup> September, 2015 tendered by the defendant's DW1 and admitted in evidence as Exhibit "D10" at the trial is admissible in evidence notwithstanding the claimant's counsel's objection to its admissibility.<o:p></o:p></span></p> </div> <span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri;mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-fareast-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language: AR-SA"><br clear="all" style="page-break-before:auto;mso-break-type:section-break"> </span> <div class="WordSection2"></div> <span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri;mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-fareast-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language: AR-SA"><br clear="all" style="page-break-before:always;mso-break-type:section-break"> </span> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">Counsel submitted that the Defendant sought to tender a certificate pleaded in paragraph 6 of its Amended Statement of Defence and Counter-Claim dated 13<sup>th</sup> July, 2015 through its sole witness, Mr. Aniemeka Umeonyido (CW1). The Claimant<span style="color:#585D5F">'</span>s Counsel raised a two-pronged legal objection to the admissibility of the said "Computer Certificate<span style="color:#585D5F">" </span>on the grounds that firstly, the witness is not the maker and that the maker was not called as witness by the Defendant. Secondly, the document was made during the pendency of this action and that same offends Section 83 of the Evidence Act, 2011. In direct response to claimant’s counsel first objection, defendant’s counsel argued that it is settled law that a member of staff of a company is a relevant and competent witness for the company and can give evidence of a Company<span style="color:#585D5F">'</span>s transaction whether he participated in the transaction or not<span style="color:#585D5F">, </span>subject to the weight to be attached to the evidence<span style="color:#727A7D">. </span>See <b>KATE ENTERPRISE LTD vs. DAEWOO NIG. LTD (1985) 2 NWLR (Pt. 5) 116, Ratios 3-5</b> and <b>OGBAJI vs. AREWA TEXTILE PLC (2000) 11 NWLR (Pt.678) P. 322 at 337, PARAS. A-C</b>.<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""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">It is the submission of counsel that on the strength of the above-stated authorities; the Defendant’s sole witness<span style="color:#585D5F">, </span>Mr<span style="color:#727A7D">. </span>Aniemeka Umeonyido<span style="color:#727A7D">, </span>the Defendant<span style="color:#727A7D">'</span>s General Manager Human Resources Development (DW1) who featured prominently in the build-up of the facts that gave rise to the instant suit is a relevant and competent witness to give Evidence and to tender documents on behalf of the Defendant in proof of its case<span style="color:#727A7D">. </span>Counsel submitted further<span style="color:#585D5F"> </span>that the Claimant Counsel<span style="color:#585D5F">'</span>s objection on this ground is baseless and not in consonance with the extant law relating to the competence of a witness called by a Company to give evidence and tender documents in relation to the facts given rise to the action. The Court was urged to hold that DW1 is a competent witness to tender Exhibit D10<span style="color:#494E4F"> </span>and to give evidence of the facts represented in paragraph 6 of the Defendant's Amended Statement of Defence on behalf of the Defendant irrespective of the fact that he is not the maker thereof or did not<span style="color:#494E4F">, </span>take part in the transaction that gave rise to the instant suit.<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-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"">With respect to the second part of the claimant counsel’s objection, counsel argued that</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> as a general principle<span style="color:#494E4F">, </span>documents made by a person interested at a time when proceedings are pending or is anticipated are not admissible. However, the provisions of Section 83(3) of the Evidence Act excludes documents made in anticipation of litigation by a <span style="color:#494E4F">'</span>person who is not personally interested<span style="color:#494E4F">' </span>in the outcome of the litigation<span style="color:#494E4F">. </span>Thus, where the interest of the maker of the document is purely official or as a servant or employee having no direct interest in the outcome of the litigation, the provision will not be applicable to him and as such the document is admissible. Counsel referred to the Court of Appeal’s decision in <b>ANISU vs. OSAYOMI (2008) 15 NWLR (Pt. 1110) 246 at 275 PARAS. B-F</b> as follows: <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"">“By virtue of Section 91 (3) of the Evidence Act as a general principle, documents made by a person interested when proceedings are pending or is anticipated are not admissible. This provision excludes documents made in anticipation of litigation by a person who is not personally interested in the outcome of the litigation. In other words, the disqualification of a person as person interested relates to only a situation where such a person has personal interest in the matter and not where he merely has interest in an official capacity. Thus where the interest of the maker of the document is purely official or as a servant or employee having no direct personal interest, the provisions do not apply to him and as such is admissible” <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"">See also <b>SUSANO PHARMACEUTICAL CO. LTD vs. SOL PHARMACY LTD (2000) 4 NWLR (Pt. 651) 60 at 68</b>.<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-font-width:105%">Counsel </span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">submitted that in the instant case<span style="color:#494E4F">, </span>Mr. Babayemi Babajide<span style="color:#494E4F">, </span>the maker of Exh<span style="color:#494E4F">i</span>bit <span style="color:#494E4F;mso-font-width:105%">"</span>D10<span style="color:#494E4F">" </span>made same disinterestedly in his official capacity and as an employee of the Defendant in his capacity as the Defendant<span style="color:#494E4F">'</span>s Senior Manager<span style="color:#494E4F">, </span>Information Technology and Planning and not as a party to the suit who would be affected by the outcome of the action<span style="color:#494E4F">, </span>therefore the facts/evidence contained in Exhibit <span style="color:#494E4F;mso-font-width:105%">"</span>D10<span style="color:#494E4F">" </span>do not fall within the meaning and contemplation of the provision of Section 83(3) of the Evidence Act<span style="color:#494E4F">, </span>as an <span style="color:#494E4F">"</span>Interested person<span style="color:#494E4F">" </span>to render Exhibit <span style="color:#494E4F;mso-font-width:105%">"</span>D10<span style="color:#494E4F">" </span>inadmissible as submitted by the Claimant Counsel's in opposition to the admissibility of Exhibit <span style="color:#494E4F;mso-font-width:105%">"</span>D10<span style="color:#494E4F">"</span><span style="color:#707A7C">. </span>It is Counsel’s further submission that the position and <span style="color:#494E4F">i</span>nterest of Mr<span style="color:#707A7C">. </span>Babayem<span style="color:#494E4F">i </span>Babajide in regard to the instant case<span style="color:#494E4F">, </span>satisfies the exception pronounced by the Court of Appeal in <b>ANISU vs. OSAYOMI (supra) at 275. PARAS B-F</b> to render Exhibit <span style="color:#3E4543">"</span>D10" relevant and admissible in evidence. On the basis of the foregoing submissions<span style="color:#3E4543">, </span>counsel urged the Court to resolve this issue in favour of the Defendant<span style="color:#3E4543">, </span>by holding that Exhibit <span style="color:#555D5E">"</span>D10<span style="color:#555D5E">" </span><span style="color:#3E4543">i</span>s relevant and admissible in evidence in proof of the facts it seeks to establish<span style="color:#555D5E">.</span><span style="color:#707A7C;mso-font-width:105%"><o:p></o:p></span></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">At this juncture, Counsel framed his last preliminary submission 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-font-weight:bold">Whether the claimant can rely on a purported reply to the defendant's statement of defence and counter- claim filed and dated 27th November, 2014 without a fresh or further witness statement on oath.<b><span style="color:#757A78"> <o:p></o:p></span></b></span></i></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">In this regard, counsel argued that it is settled law that pleadings do not constitute evidence<span style="color: #3E4543">, </span>and where pleadings are not supported by evidence<span style="color:#3E4543">, </span>it is deemed by the Court as having been abandoned<span style="color:#555D5E">. </span>See the following cases of: <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.75in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.25in;mso-list:l1 level1 lfo4"><!--[if !supportLists]--><b><span style="font-size: 12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"">1.<span style="font-weight: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span></b><!--[endif]--><b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"">OLUSANYA <span style="color:#3E4543">vs. </span>OSINLEYE (2013) 7 NWLR (Pt. 136) 148 at 168 and171<o:p></o:p></span></b></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.75in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.25in;mso-list:l1 level1 lfo4"><!--[if !supportLists]--><b><span style="font-size: 12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"">2.<span style="font-weight: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span></b><!--[endif]--><b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif""> EYA vs. OLOPADE (2011) 11 NWLR (Pt.1259) P. 505 at 529 and 534<o:p></o:p></span></b></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.75in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.25in;mso-list:l1 level1 lfo4"><!--[if !supportLists]--><b><span style="font-size: 12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"">3.<span style="font-weight: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span></b><!--[endif]--><b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"">MILITARY GOVERNOR, LAGOS STATE vs. ADEYIGA (2012) 5 NWLR (Pt.1293) 291 at 337.<o:p></o:p></span></b></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-weight:bold">Counsel further argued that in</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> the instant case<span style="color:#3E4543">, </span>the Claimant filed a purported Reply to the Defendant<span style="color:#3E4543">'</span>s Statement of Defence and Counter Claim dated and filed on 27th November<span style="color:#3E4543">, </span>2014 without filing a corresponding fresh or further witness Statement on Oath encompassing the facts and Exhibits contained in his Statement of Facts and Reply to the Defendant's Statement of Defence and Counter-Claim. He submitted that it is settled law that it is the act of adopting a Witness Statement on Oath in a judicial proceedings that transmutes the facts contained in the Witness Statement on Oath from mere averments into evidence which the Court can <span style="color:#3E4543">j</span>udicially evaluate and if found probable, rely on same to reach a conclusion on the issues submitted by parties to the action for determination. Counsel cited the case of <b>AREGBESOLA vs. OYINLOLA (2011) 9 NWLR (PT.1253) 458 at 562-563, PARAS A-E, 564-565<span style="color:#3E4543">, </span>PARAS. D-C</b> where the court held thus<span style="color:#555D5E">: </span><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Style" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify">“Once the statement of a witness is adopted, it becomes his evidence in chief and the court is under a duty to evaluate same and not merely to treat same as mere allegation requiring additional proof as done by the tribunal in this case.”<o:p></o:p></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">See also the case of <b>SPLINTER (NIG) LTD vs. OASIS FINANCE LTD (2013) 18 NWLR (Pt<span style="color:#3E4543">.</span>1385) 188 at 227<span style="color:#3E4543">, </span>PARAS D-F</b>.<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-font-weight:bold"> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-weight:bold">Counsel </span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">submitted that the Claimant’s failure to file and adopt a f<span style="color:#3E4543">r</span>esh o<span style="color:#3E4543">r </span>furthe<span style="color:#3E4543">r </span>Witness Statement on Oath encompassing the facts conta<span style="color:#3E4543">i</span>ned <span style="color:#3E4543">i</span>n his Statement of Facts and Reply to the Defendant's Amended Statement of Defence and Counte<span style="color:#3E4543">r</span><span style="color:#757A78">-</span>Cla<span style="color:#3E4543">i</span>m<span style="color:#3E4543"> </span>should <span style="color:#292F2C">be deemed to have abandoned his averments contained in his Reply to the Defendant</span><span style="color:#4D5252">'</span><span style="color:#292F2C">s Amended Statement of Defence and Counter-Claim and such facts should not be </span><span style="color:#4D5252">j</span><span style="color:#292F2C">ud</span><span style="color:#4D5252">i</span><span style="color:#292F2C">cially elevated to the realm of evidence which the Court can evaluate in support of the Claimant</span><span style="color:#4D5252">'</span><span style="color:#292F2C">s case. Counsel urged the Court to hold that the Claimant</span><span style="color:#4D5252">'</span><span style="color:#292F2C">s failure to file and adopt either a fresh or further Witness Statement on Oath encompassing both the facts contained in his Statement of Facts and Reply to the Defendant</span><span style="color:#4D5252">'</span><span style="color:#292F2C">s Amended Statement of Defence and Counter-Claim</span><span style="color:#4D5252">, </span><span style="color:#292F2C">is a failure to furnish the Court with evidence in proof of the averments contained in the pleadings</span><span style="color:#4D5252">, </span><span style="color:#292F2C">thus the Claimant is deemed to have abandoned his pleadings contained in his Reply to the Defendant</span><span style="color:#4D5252">'</span><span style="color:#292F2C">s Statement of Defence and Counter-Claim</span><span style="color:#4D5252">.<o:p></o:p></span></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:4.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:#292F2C"> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:#292F2C">He further urged the Court to resolve this issue in favour of the Defendant by holding that the Claiman</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:#4D5252">t </span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:#292F2C">cannot rely on the fundamentally defective Reply to Defendant</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:#4D5252">'</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:#292F2C">s Statement of Defence and Counter-Claim (now Defendant</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:#4D5252">'</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:#292F2C">s Amended Statement of Defence and Counter-Claim)</span><span style="font-size: 12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:#4D5252">, </span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:#292F2C">the same having been abandoned</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";color:#4D5252">. <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";color:#292F2C;mso-bidi-font-weight:bold"> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:#292F2C;mso-bidi-font-weight:bold">In the PART B<b> </b></span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; color:#292F2C">of the Counsel’s written address, counsel formulated five issues for determination</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; color:#4D5252">: </span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; color:#292F2C"><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.75in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.25in;mso-list:l7 level1 lfo5"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-size: 12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; color:#292F2C">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"; color:#292F2C">Whether the Claimant</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:#4D5252">'</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:#292F2C">s Contract of employment with the Defendant was unlawfully terminated</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:#4D5252">.</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:#292F2C"><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.75in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.25in;mso-list:l7 level1 lfo5"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-size: 12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; color:#292F2C">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"; color:#292F2C">Whether by the Claimant</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:#4D5252">'</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:#292F2C">s Contract of employment with the Defendant as expressly embodied in the Claimant</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:#4D5252">'</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:#292F2C">s letter of employment and the Defendant</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:#4D5252">'</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:#292F2C">s Employees Handbook</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; color:#4D5252">, </span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; color:#292F2C">the Claimant is entitled to End Year Bonus of 2013</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:#4D5252">. </span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:#292F2C"><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.75in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.25in;mso-list:l7 level1 lfo5"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-size: 12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; color:#292F2C">3.<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"; color:#292F2C">Whether by the evidence led at the trial</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:#4D5252">, </span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:#292F2C">the C</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; color:#4D5252">l</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; color:#292F2C">aimant </span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; color:#4D5252">i</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; color:#292F2C">s entitled to severance benefit of <s>N</s>10</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:#4D5252">,</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:#292F2C">000,000.00 (Ten Million Naira</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; color:#4D5252">) </span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; color:#292F2C">or any sum at all</span><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">. </span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:#292F2C"><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.75in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.25in;mso-list:l7 level1 lfo5"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-size: 12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; color:#292F2C">4.<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"; color:#292F2C">Whether the Claimant is entitled to the sum of <s>N</s>5</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:#4D5252">,</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:#292F2C">000</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:#4D5252">,</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:#292F2C">000</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:#4D5252">.</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:#292F2C">00 (Five Million Naira) or any sum at all as general damages for loss</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:#4D5252">, </span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:#292F2C">inconvenience and expenditure purportedly occasioned by the alleged breach of the Claimant</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:#4D5252">'</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:#292F2C">s Contract of Employment with the Defendant</span><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">. </span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:#292F2C"><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.75in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.25in;mso-list:l7 level1 lfo5"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-size: 12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; color:#292F2C">5.<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"">Whether by the evidence led at the trial the Defendant proved its Counter-Claim against the Claimant.<span style="color:#292F2C"><o:p></o:p></span></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:4.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">Firstly, counsel submitted that the Claimant alleged in paragraphs 10<span style="color:#424847">, </span>11 and 12 of his Statement of Facts that his contract of employment with the Defendant was te<span style="color:#424847">r</span>minated in a manner contrary to the provisions of the terms of his employment. The Defendant in paragraph 8 and 9 of its Amended Statement of Defence and Counter Claim denied the C<span style="color:#424847">l</span>aimant<span style="color:#5B605D">'</span>s Claim. The DW1 gave evidence in proof of these facts conta<span style="color:#424847">i</span>ned <span style="color:#424847">i</span>n parag<span style="color:#424847">r</span>aphs 8 and 9 of its Amended Statement of Defence and Counte<span style="color:#424847">r</span>-C<span style="color:#424847">l</span>aim in paragraphs 8 and 9 of DW1’s Witness Statement on Oath<span style="color:#5B605D">. </span>This evidence was further restated by the DW1 under cross – examination. Counsel <span style="color:#242B27">submitted that the DW1</span><span style="color:#606564">'</span><span style="color:#242B27">s ev</span><span style="color:#414746">i</span><span style="color:#242B27">dence during his examination -in</span><span style="color:#414746">-</span><span style="color:#242B27">chief and under cross-examination by the Claimant</span><span style="color:#414746">'</span><span style="color:#242B27">s Counsel </span><span style="color:#414746">i</span><span style="color:#242B27">s in conformity and in strict compliance with the Claimant</span><span style="color:#414746">'</span><span style="color:#242B27">s terms of employment. Counsel submitted further that it is settled law that parties are bound by the terms of their contract and that words used in a contract of employment are read </span><span style="color:#414746">i</span><span style="color:#242B27">n the ordinary daily application of the words in the relationship between the parties</span><span style="color:#606564">. </span><span style="color:#242B27">See <b>IMONIKHE vs. UNITY BANK PLC (2011) 12 NWLR (Pt.1262) 624 at 639-640</b>. It is counsel’s further submission that the te</span><span style="color:#414746">r</span><span style="color:#242B27">ms of the C</span><span style="color:#414746">l</span><span style="color:#242B27">aimant</span><span style="color:#606564">'</span><span style="color:#242B27">s employment regulating the term</span><span style="color:#414746">i</span><span style="color:#242B27">nation of his contract of employmen</span><span style="color:#414746">t </span><span style="color:#242B27">a</span><span style="color:#414746">r</span><span style="color:#242B27">e expressly contained in paragraph 12 (f) and (g) of the Claimant</span><span style="color:#414746">'</span><span style="color:#242B27">s employme</span><span style="color:#414746">nt </span><span style="color:#242B27">letter</span><span style="color:#414746">, </span><span style="color:#242B27">EXHIBIT </span><span style="color:#414746">“</span><span style="color:#242B27">A</span><span style="color:#414746">” </span><span style="color:#242B27">which reads thus</span><span style="color:#606564">: </span><span style="color:#242B27"><o:p></o:p></span></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:#242B27; mso-font-width:123%;mso-bidi-font-style:italic">“(f) </span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:#242B27; mso-font-width:105%">On </span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; color:#242B27;mso-font-width:109%;mso-bidi-font-style:italic">or after completion </span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; color:#242B27;mso-font-width:105%">of </span><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:#242B27;mso-font-width:109%; mso-bidi-font-style:italic">your probationary period, either party giving one </span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:#242B27">(1) month's written notice of termination or payment of one (1) month's salary in lieu thereof may make termination of your employment relationship established by this letter” <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-font-width: 109%;mso-bidi-font-style:italic">(g) This contract is subject to the terms and conditions </span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-font-width:105%">of </span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-font-width:109%;mso-bidi-font-style:italic">employment </span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-font-width: 107%">as </span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-font-width:109%;mso-bidi-font-style:italic">contained in the Staff Handbook and </span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-font-width:107%">as </span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-font-width:109%;mso-bidi-font-style:italic">may be revised from time to time and forms </span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-font-width:106%">an </span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-font-width:109%;mso-bidi-font-style:italic">addendum to this contract". <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify;text-indent:.5in"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">Similarly, Article 5.4 paragraph 5 of the Defendant's Employees Handbook provides as follows: <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-font-width: 109%;mso-bidi-font-style:italic">(5) In the case </span><span style="font-size: 12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-font-width:105%">of </span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-font-width: 109%;mso-bidi-font-style:italic">resignation or retirement, any amount outstanding will be deducted from terminal benefit payable to the affected staff". <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"">Counsel argued that an ordinary daily interpretation of the provisions of the Claimant's conditions of employment regulating termination of the contract of employment between the Claimant and Defendant lays down two methods of determining the Claimant's employment. These methods are either by any party giving one month's written notice of termination, or by payment of one (1) month's salary in lieu of written notice of termination. It is counsel’s further argument that in the present case, the Defendant in terminating the Claimant's employment opted to pay to the Claimant one month's salary in lieu of notice. The defendant exercised<span style="color:#212824"> </span>its right under Paragraph 5 of Article 5.4 of the Claimant's Employee Handbook, which was duly incorporated by reference into the Claimants Letter of Employment to lawfully withhold the payment of the one month's salary in lieu of notice to the Claimant. The Defendant duly communicated this position to the Claimant vide the Letter of Termination of Employment. <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"">It is the contention of counsel that it is undisputed that the Claimant was at the time of termination of his employment heavily indebted to the Defendant to the tune of One Million, and Ninety-One Thousand, Six Hundred and Sixty-Six Naira, Ninety Five Kobo (<s>N</s>1,091,666.95) broken down into Eight Hundred and Seventy Four Thousand, Nine Hundred and Ninety-Nine Naira, Ninety-Five Kobo (<s>N</s>874,999.95) representing balance of Seniors Staff car loan; and Two Hundred and Sixteen Thousand, Six Hundred and Sixty-Seven Naira (<s>N</s>216,667.00) representing balance of Upfront Housing Loan advanced to the Claimant at his request. This fact was admitted by CW1 under cross-examination by the Defendant's Counsel and as such need no further proof that the above-mentioned state of facts existed or is true. The law is trite that facts admitted needs no further proof. See <b>ADUSEI vs. ADEBAYO (2012) 3 NWLR (PT.1288) 534 at 552</b>. Counsel submitted that the termination of the Claimant's employment by the Defendant was unimpeachable as it was in line with one of the procedures agreed by the parties in EXHIBIT "A" as a lawful and legal procedure for terminating the Claimant's contract of employment. On the basis of the foregoing submissions, counsel urged the Court to resolve issue one in the negative by holding that the Claimant's employment was lawfully terminated. <i><o:p></o:p></i></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:4.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-font-width:105%"> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:#232A26;mso-font-width:105%">On issue two, counsel stated that t</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";color:#282F2B">he Claimant alleged in paragraph 13 of his Statement of Facts and CW1</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";color:#5D6160">'</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:#282F2B">s Statement on Oath respectively that prior to the termination of his contract of employment with the Defendant, the Defendant</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";color:#5D6160">'</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:#282F2B">s management approved the sum of <s>N</s>215,000.00 (Two Hundred and Fifteen Thousand Naira) as year-end benefit for the year 2013 vide an email sent to him in that regard</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:#5D6160">. </span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:#282F2B">It is on the basis that the Claimant had urged the Court to order the Defendant to pay to him the sum of <s>N</s>215</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:#5D6160">,</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:#282F2B">000</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:#5D6160">.</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:#282F2B">00 being and representing the Year-End Bonus for 2013 approved by the Defendant</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:#5D6160">'</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:#282F2B">s management</span><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">. </span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; color:#282F2B">However</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; color:#5D6160">, </span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; color:#282F2B">the Defendant in paragraph 10 of its Amended Statement of Defence and Counter-Claim denied this Claim. Counsel submitted that there is nowhere either in the agreement between the parties that it is stated that the Claimant is entitled to end of year bonus of any amount whatsoever. The trite position of the law is that parties are bound by the terms and conditions of their contract</span><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">. </span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; color:#282F2B">See <b>KOIKI vs. MAGNUSSON (1999) 8 NWLR (Pt. 615) 492 at 514</b>. Also, a party is also not allowed in law to go outside the provisions of the contract to import terms which are alien to the contract between the parties as the Claimant is attempting to do in the instant case. In other words</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:#5D6160">, </span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:#282F2B">where parties have embodied the terms of their contract in a written document</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:#5D6160">, </span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:#282F2B">extrinsic evidence is not admissible to add</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:#5D6160">, </span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:#282F2B">vary</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:#5D6160">, </span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:#282F2B">subtract from or contradict the terms of the written instrument</span><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">. </span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:#282F2B">It extends to extrinsic evidence in writing such as draft of agreement, preliminary arrangements and letters relating to previous negotiations. See the case of <b>GUARARA SECURITIES AND FINANCE LTD vs. T.I</b></span><b><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">.</span></b><b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:#282F2B">C. LTD (1999) 2 NWLR (Pt. 589) 29 at 47-48 PARAS. H-C</span></b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:#282F2B">. <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";color:#282F2B">Again, the DW1 also gave evidence in proof of the Defendant</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:#5D6160">'</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:#282F2B">s averment in paragraph 10 of the Defendant</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:#5D6160">'</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:#282F2B">s Amendment Statement of Defence and Counter-Claim that the Claimant is not entitled to the sum of <s>N</s>215,000</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";color:#5D6160">.</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";color:#282F2B">00 as end of year/Christmas bonus as same was not provided by the terms of his employment and that end of the year/Christmas bonus is paid at the unfettered discretion of the Defendant to its employees whose contract of service is still subsisting at the end of each business year was not discredited in any way by the Claimant Counsel under cross-examination. </span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">The Claimant did not aver any further facts in rebuttal of these facts in issue neither did the Claimant furnish any documentary evidence in proof of his entitlement to the sum of <s>N</s>215<span style="color:#4D5352">,</span>000.00 as end of year bonus<span style="color:#4D5352">. </span>Counsel submitted that the evidence of DW1 on this point remains unchallenged and urged the Court to accept the evidence of DW1 in respect of this issue as true in proof of the fact contained in paragraph 10 of the Defendant<span style="color:#4D5352">'</span>s Statement of Defence and Counter-Claim<span style="color:#4D5352">. </span>See Sections 131(1)&(2) & 132 of the Evidence Act; <b>HARUNA vs. MODIBO (2004) 16 NWLR (Pt. 990) 487 at 545</b>.<span style="color:#282F2B"><o:p></o:p></span></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:4.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">It is counsel’s further submission that the Defendant<span style="color:#4D5352">'</span>s evidence contained in paragraph 10 of the DW1<span style="color:#4D5352">'</span>s Statement on Oath having been established and not discredited by the Claimant<span style="color:#4D5352">'</span>s Counsel under cross-examination<span style="color:#4D5352">, </span>the burden of proving otherwise shifts to the Claimant and the court<span style="color:#4D5352">, </span>in the absence of any such rebuttal<span style="color:#4D5352">, </span>is duty bound to accept the evidence of the Defendant<span style="color:#4D5352">'</span>s DW1 as true<span style="color:#4D5352">, </span>credible and uncontroverted<span style="color:#4D5352">. </span>See Section 133(2) of the Evidence Act; <b>DRAGETANOS CONST. (NIG) LTD vs. FM. V. LTD (2011) 16 NWLR (Pt.1273) 308 at 370-371. PARAS. F-C</b>.<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"">Also, counsel submitted that the Claimant having admitted under cross-examination that the end of year bonus is not paid to employees whose contract of employment had ceased to subsist or terminated and that as at the November<span style="color:#4D5352">, </span>2013 when the year-end/Christmas bonus was paid he had ceased to be in the employment of the Defendant<span style="color:#4D5352">. </span>The Defendant had nothing more to prove that the Claimant is no<span style="color:#4D5352">t </span>entitled to be paid the year-end/Christmas bonus in line with the Defendant<span style="color:#4D5352">'</span>s evidence in paragraph 10 of DW1<span style="color:#4D5352">'</span>s Statement on Oath. In the light of the foregoing submissions<span style="color:#4D5352">, </span>counsel urged <span style="color:#4D5352">t</span>he Court to resolve issue two in favour of the Defendant. <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""> </span><span style="font-size:4.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""><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"">On issue three, counsel stated that the Claimant prayed in paragraph 20(2) of his Statement of Fact that the Honourable Court should order the Defendant pay to him severance benefit to the tune of <s>N</s>10,000,000.00 (Ten Million Naira) calculated fairly as a Senior Staff of the Defendant. The Defendant in paragraph 14 of the Defendant's Amended Statement of Defence and paragraph 13 of the DW1's Witness Statement on Oath denied the Claimant's averments in respect of this claim and put the Claimant to the strictest proof of same. Counsel submitted that the law is that he who asserts the existence or non-existence of a particular state of fact has the burden of proving same and that he who asserts or Claim a relief must prove it by credible evidence and judgment for the grant of such Claim must be based on legal evidence of the highest probative value and weight. See Sections 131(1) and 133(1) of the Evidence Act, and <b>A.G. OYO STATE vs. FAIRFLAKES HOTELS (NO.2) (1989) 5 NWLR (Pt.121) 255 at 285, PARAS. F-G</b>. He submitted that it is settled law that reliefs sought by the Claimant in an action cannot be regarded as pleadings or major facts. Thus, where the Claimant fails to adduce evidence in proof or in support of a prayer or relief the same is deemed to have been abandoned and liable to be dismissed. See <b>YUSUFU vs. OBASANJO (2003) 15 NWLR (Pt.843) 293 at 307-308</b>. Counsel argued that in the instant case, the Claimant failed, to aver or produce any evidence in proof of his relief in paragraph 20(2) of his Statement of Facts, neither did he depose to any evidence in support of the said claim in the CW1's Witness Statement on Oath. Consequently, counsel urged the Court to hold that the Claimant had failed to fulfil the fundamental rule for consideration and grant of relief in civil proceedings, and as such the Claimant's relief in Paragraph 20(2) for the sum of <s>N</s>10,000,000.00 (Ten Million Naira) for which no credible evidence of the highest probative value and weight is adduced in proof thereof, should be deemed abandoned and ultimately dismissed for want of evidence in proof of same. <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"">In the event that the court holds otherwise, Counsel argued further that the Claimant's relief under this head of Claim is in the nature of special damage which the Claimant is under a legal obligation to strictly prove by furnishing the Court with material evidence or the basis of his computation of the sum claimed. See <b>ABI vs.CBN (2012) 3 NWLR (Pt.1286) 1 at 42.</b><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"">He further submitted that the Claimant having failed to satisfy this mandatory requirement, the Court should refuse the grant of this head of Claim for want of credible evidence of the highest probative value and weight in proof of same. In the light of the foregoing submission, counsel urged the Court to resolve this issue in the negative and in favour of the Defendant. <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""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">Regarding issue four, counsel stated that the Claimant in paragraph 20(5) claims the sum of <s>N</s>5 Million as general Damages for the loss, inconvenience and expenditures for breach of contract of employment. While the Defendant in paragraphs 14 and 13 of the Defendant<span style="color:#585E5D">'</span>s Amended Statement of Defence and Counter-Claim and DW1 Witness Statement on Oath respectively, denied this averment. Counsel submitted that the law is that the measure of damages for breach of contract of employment/wrongful termination of a contract of employment is the amount provided for in the contract of employment in lieu of notice. See <b>NITEL vs. UGBE (2002) 3 NWLR (Pt.735) 186 at 202</b>. He submitted further that the award of general damages is alien to the law of contract. Damages are awarded for breach of contract strictly on the basis of special loss suffered and such loss must be within the contemplation of the contracting parties at the same time of entering into the contract. Also<span style="color:#555A5A">, </span>the loss must be rea<span style="color:#3F4444">l </span>and not bogus<span style="color:#555A5A">, </span>speculative or imagined. It is trite that a party claiming damages has a duty or onus of furnishing the Court with sufficient materials required for the assessment of the damages<span style="color:#7C8782">. </span>See <b>AMODU vs. AMODE (1990) 5 NWLR (Pt.150) 356 at 373, PARAS. A- B; MOROHUNFOLA vs. KWARA STATE COLLEGE OF TECHNOLOGY (1990) NWLR (Pt.145) 506 at 519</b>. Counsel submitted that in the instant case<span style="color:#3F4444">, </span>the Claimant failed to provide the Court with sufficient material required for the assessment of the sum of <s>N</s>5 Million Claimed as general damages. In the light of the foregoing submissions<span style="color:#555A5A">, </span>counsel urged the Court to resolve issue four in the negative and in favour of the Defendant. <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""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">With respect to issue five, counsel submitted that the Defendant in paragraphs 1-6 of its Counter-Claim averred that before the Claimant<span style="color:#3F4444">'</span>s contract of employment was terminated by the Defendant<span style="color:#3F4444">, </span>the Claimant was indebted to the Defendant to the tune of <s>N</s>1<span style="color:#555A5A">,</span>091<span style="color:#555A5A">,</span>166<span style="color:#555A5A">.</span>67 <span style="color:#3F4444">(</span>One Million<span style="color:#555A5A">, </span>Ninety-One Thousand<span style="color:#3F4444">, </span>One Hundred and Sixty-Six Naira<span style="color:#555A5A">, </span>Sixty-Seven Kobo) being the total balance of the Senior Staff (Car loan<span style="color:#3F4444">) </span>and Upfront Housing Loans the Defendant advanced to the Claimant<span style="color:#3F4444">, </span>wh<span style="color:#3F4444">i</span>le the Claimant<span style="color:#555A5A">'</span>s contract o<span style="color:#3F4444">f </span>employment was still subsisting. Counsel submitted that in discharge of the evident<span style="color:#3F4444">i</span>a<span style="color:#3F4444">l </span>burden placed on the Defendant to prove his claim as asserted in its Counter-Claim<span style="color:#555A5A">, </span>the Defendant furnished evidence in proof of the facts averred in <span style="color:#3F4444">i</span>ts Counter-Claim vide the evidence of DW1 contained in <span style="color:#3F4444">i</span>n paragraphs 14-22 of the DW1<span style="color:#555A5A">'</span>s W<span style="color:#3F4444">i</span>tness that the said loan advanced to the Claimant and some outstanding sums was still unpaid at the material time the Claimant filed this action. <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"">Counsel argued that the evidence of DW1 in respect of the Defendant's Claim in paragraph 8 of its Counter Claim was not discredited under cross- examination by the Claimant's Counsel. Thus, counsel urged the Court to accept this evidence as true and in proof of the fact that the Claimant is indebted to the Defendant, which the Claimant is liable to pay to the Defendant upon an order of this Honourable Court made thereof. See section 131(1)(2) and 132 of the Evidence Act and <b>HARUNA vs. MODIBBO (2004) 16 NWLR (Pt. 990) 487 at 545</b>. In the light of the foregoing submission, counsel urged the Court to resolve issue five in the affirmative and in favour of the Defendant. <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""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">In conclusion, counsel submitted that the Claimant has failed in all material respects to prove his case. Counsel urged the Court to dismiss the Claimant's Claim in its entirety for being baseless, frivolous, gold digging and abuse of the process of the Court and award substantial damages against the Clamant. Counsel also urged the Court to hold that the Defendant has proven its Counter-Claim against the Claimant and accordingly grant the Defendant's Counter-Claim.<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""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">In the Claimant counsel's Final Written address filed on 9<sup>th</sup> February 2016, counsel proceeded to first address the issues raised in Part A of the Defendant’s final written address which dealt with preliminary legal contentions. On this note, counsel firstly submitted that relevancy is the basis for admissibility of any piece of document or evidence before the Court of law.<i> </i>Exhibit "D10" as tendered does not have any relevance directly or indirectly to the issues before this court. In counsel’s view, the document does not seek to prove the liability or otherwise of any of the parties. Thus, Exhibit D10 is not relevant and should be excluded. <i><o:p></o:p></i></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:4.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-style:italic"> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-style:italic">Second, counsel contended that </span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">the argument of learned counsel as c<span style="color:#565D5A">o</span>ntained in paragraphs 2.2.2 and 2.2.3 of the Defendant's final address is misleading. He contended further that the DW1 does not proffer an expert explanation of software codes and computer digits, figures and data<span style="color:#565D5A">, </span>as contained in Exhibit "D10". Also, at the point of tendering the do<span style="color:#58605F">c</span>ument the learned counsel failed to lay foundation as<span style="color:#58605F"> </span>the reason why the maker cannot be called as a witness, neither did counsel lead evidence (through DWl) to show that DW1 had the requisite computer/software knowledge of the information contained in the document. Counsel submitted that by virtue of Section 83 of the Evidence Act 2011, only the maker of a document or a person with adequate/sufficient knowledge of the content can tender a document. Thus, the document should be declared inadmissible. <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""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">Thirdly, counsel argued that it is trite law that a document made by a party during the pendency of a suit is inadmissible. See <b>NISU vs. OSAYOMI (2008)15 NWLR (Pt. 1110) 246</b>. Counsel urged the court to uphold his submission in this regard. Again, counsel stated that upon been served with the Defendant's statement of defence and counter-claim, the Claimant filed a reply to the statement of defence. In that reply, the Claimant pleaded seven (7) documents and tendered all in evidence in support of his pleadings as contained in his reply. The law is that pleadings must be supported by evidence. See <b>BALA vs. BANKOLE (1986) 3 NWLR (Pt. 27) 141 and AJUWON vs. AKANNI (1993) 9 NWLR (Pt. 316) 182</b>. <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""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">Counsel submitted that the defendant’s counsel wrongly applied the decision in <b>AREGBESOLA vs. OYINLOLA (supra)</b>. In this regard, counsel is of the opinion that the Statement of a witness on oath is oral Evidence reduced in writing. Witness statement on oath is not documentary evidence. The Claimant supported his, pleadings in the Reply with "documentary evidence", in addition to his written statement on oath made in support of his statement of facts. The claimant also testified before this court and tendered documentary evidence to support his case and his pleading as contained in the Reply. Counsel submitted that the claimant's Reply is proper before this court; it is supported by credible documentary evidence and should be relied upon by this court. <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""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">In the PART B of Claimant Counsel’s address, six issues were distilled for determination as follows:<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.75in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.25in;mso-list:l3 level1 lfo6"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-size: 12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-font-style:italic">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-font-style: italic">Whether the claimant's contract of employment with the defendant was unlawfully terminated.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.75in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.25in;mso-list:l3 level1 lfo6"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-size: 12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"">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-bidi-font-style:italic">Whether the claimant is entitled to one month's salary in lieu of notice as stipulated in the claimants letter of employment. </span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.75in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.25in;mso-list:l3 level1 lfo6"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-size: 12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"">3.<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-font-style:italic">Whether the claimant is entitled to severanc<span style="color:#505959">e </span>benefit to the tune of <s>N</s>10,000, 000. 00 (Ten Million Naira) calculated fairly as <span style="color:#505959">a </span>senior staff of the defendant.</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.75in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.25in;mso-list:l3 level1 lfo6"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-size: 12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"">4.<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-font-style:italic">Whether the claimant is entitled to the sum of <s>N</s>215,000.00 </span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">(Two Hundred and Fifteen Thousand Naira) being the claimant's end year bonus for 2013 as approved by the defendant's management.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.75in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.25in;mso-list:l3 level1 lfo6"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-size: 12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"">5.<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-font-style:italic">Whether the claimant is entitled to the sum of <s>N</s>5,000,000.00 </span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">(Five Million Naira) as general damages for the loss, inconveniences and expenditures for the breach of contract of employment by the defendant. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.75in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.25in;mso-list:l3 level1 lfo6"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-size: 12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"">6.<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-font-style:italic">Whether the defendant proved its counter-claim against the claimant.</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> <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""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">On the first issue, claimant submitted that the Claimant stated in evidence, particularly in paragraphs 10, 11 and 12 of his statement on oath that his employment with the defendant was terminated without the said one month notice or payment of one month's salary in lieu as prescribed by EXHIBIT A. The DW1 under cross-examination agreed with the Claimant that the one month notice was not given and that the one month salary in lieu of the notice was not paid the Claimant.<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""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">The DW1 also stated that the claimant is entitled to one month salary in lieu. Counsel submitted that the Defendant is not empowered to withhold the issuance of notice of termination or payment to the Claimant, salary in lieu of Notice. In fact, such notice or the salary in lieu of notice is a condition precedent to termination as provided in paragraph 12 (F) of EXHIBIT A. Counsel referred to the case of <b>IBAMA vs. SPDC (Nig.) Ltd (2005) 17 NWLR (Pt. 954) 354 at 367</b> where the Supreme Court held thus: <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"">“The contract of service is the pivot or foundation upon which an employee must found his case. He succeeds or fails upon the terms. Therefore in a written contract of service, the court will not look into any matter outside the terms stipulated and agreed therein between the parties to the contract in determining the respective rights and obligations of the parties.” <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"">Counsel submitted therefore, that by the authority of IBAMA’s case the court cannot rely on the conditions imposed on the claimant in the termination letter as a basis to withhold the prerequisite condition of notice or salary in lieu of same. Counsel urged the court to interpret the terms and conditions of the contract in plain words and meaning, and to hold that the conditions precedent for termination of the claimant's employment was not strictly followed as held by the Supreme Court above. <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"">Finally, counsel argued that an employee who complains that his employment has been wrongfully or unlawfully terminated should place before the court the terms of the contract of employment; and to prove in what manner the said terms were breached by the employer. In the instant case, the claimant has sufficiently discharged this burden. The DWI only cited the condition it gave the Claimant on the termination letter as the reason for not complying with the terms and condition precedent to termination as contained in EXHIBIT A.<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"">Counsel referred to the Supreme Court’s decision in the case of <b>IDUFUEKO vs. PFIZER PROD. LTD (2014) 41 WRN page 1 at pg. 10,</b> to wit:<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"">“it is appropriate to bear in mind that in a contract of employment, the element of unlawfulness arises, where in carrying out the decision to terminate the employment, the employed or employee has failed, neglected or refused to adhere to the principles laid down by statute, in a case of contract with statutory flavor, or by the terms of contract contained in the letter of employment, in ordinary contract of employment”<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"">Counsel urged the Court to hold that the termination of the claimant’s employment by the defendant was unlawful for failing to strictly comply with the terms and conditions of their contract, and to resolve this issue in favour of the claimant.<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-font-width:112%"> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-font-width:112%">On the issue two for determination,</span><b><i><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-font-width: 108%"> </span></i></b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">Counsel submitted that the law is that where termination of contract of service was found to have been wrongful, the Claimant would be entitled to the salary for the length of time during which notice of the termination would have been given in accordance with the contract of employment. See <b>CHUKWUMA vs. SHELL PETROLEUM (1993) 4 SCNJ 1</b>.<b><i><o:p></o:p></i></b></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">Counsel urged the court to hold that since the Defendant itself agreed that neither the notice nor the salary in lieu of notice was paid to the claimant in accordance with the terms of the employment, the Claimant is entitled to one month salary. <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""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">On issue three, counsel argued that the claimant pleaded the claim for the payment of his severance/terminal benefit in paragraphs 16 and 17 of the statement of facts and tendered Exhibit "G" titled: “RE: TERMINATION OF CONTRACT/DEMAND FOR SEVERANCE BENEFITS AND ENTITLEMENT”. Thus, the document and its contents becomes credible, proper and reliable evidence before this court. In paragraphs 11 and 12 of the defendant's amended Statement of Defence, the Defendant stated that it received the claim. Thus, Counsel urged the court to hold that this claim was properly pleaded. It is the submission of counsel that the claimant’s claim to terminal benefit is supported by his evidence in chief and DW1’s evidence under cross-examination. He further stated that the National Joint Industrial Council gave companies (including the defendant) guidelines on how to pay gratuity which the Defendant itself expressly incorporated in Article 5 para. H at page 34 of Exhibit L. <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-font-width:105%">Similarly, Exhibit "B" (i.e. the termination Letter) clearly stated that the </span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">Claimant is entitled to certain monies and Severances package. Owing to the fact that the Defendant has agreed that the claimant is entitled to severance benefit as stated above, counsel submitted that it is just for the court to order the payment of same to the Claimant. Again, Exhibit L provides in Article 5 para H a page 34 that the terminal benefit due to a staff (Claimant in the instant case) is calculated in accordance with NJIC (National Joint Industrial Council). The claimant being a senior staff in the Defendant Company knows the practices and how much he is entitled to, in line with the NJIC guideline and came up with a sum to the tune of <s>N</s>10,000,000.00 (Ten Million Naira) as stated in evidence. The Defendant did not lead any contrary evidence to counter the claim. Again, the Defendant did not put any sum or evidence before this court to counter the claimant's claim of <s>N</s>10,000,000.00 (Ten Million Naira). Counsel argued that the Defendant admits that sum as the claimant's entitlement in Exhibit D5 page 2 lines 12-14 reads thus: <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"">“</span></i><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">The complainant’s (i.e. the claimant) employment was terminated and all his entitlements paid in strict compliance with the terms and conditions of his employment less his indebtedness to our client” (the defendant).<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"">Counsel relied on the Supreme Court Case of <b>CHUKWU vs. SHELL PETROLEUM (SUPRA)</b>, where it was held that: <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"">"Having held however that employment was wrongfully terminated employee .... In addition however, would also be entitled to other allowances for the period ... equally he would be entitled to his entitlement under the pension schemes”<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"">He also cited the holding in <b>NMB vs. Adewummi (1972) 11 SCNJ 1</b> to wit: <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-font-style: italic">"In employment matters, and claims for wrongful dismissal the measurement of damages is prima facie, the amount that the plaintiff would have earned, had the employment continued according to the contract". <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"">See also <b>NEPA vs. ADEYEMI (2007) 3 NWLR (Pt. 1021) 315 at 321</b>. Counsel argued that the Claimant was never dismissed. Thus, the Claimant should be entitled to his gratuity as provided by the terms and condition of his employment. The issue of warning and query raised at trial by the Defendant was not proved, therefore cannot be sustained. Article 5.4 para. 2 at page 36 of Exhibit L provides thus: <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-font-width: 105%;mso-bidi-font-style:italic">"Loan is not available to any staff with a query, warning or </span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-bidi-font-style:italic">suspension on file or who has a poor disciplinary record" </span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""><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"">By the company's policy as clearly shown immediately above, Loans would not have been available to the Claimant shortly before the said termination. Therefore Exhibits D1 and D2 purportedly made in 2009 and 2011 are not warning or query from the company. They did not get to the Claimant's file because they were private conversations. Counsel urged the court to grant this claim which is <br> the claimant's labour for years in the defendant. <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""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">Regarding issue four, counsel referred the Court to Exhibit “F” titled End of Year Bonus. The said bonus was for the year January to November 2013 when it is to be paid. The claimant worked during this period and was paid even his November salary. It therefore follows that the claimant should be paid the said sum approved as bonus for this period when the claimant worked for the defendant. Counsel urged the court to hold that the claimant is entitled to the sum of <s>N</s>215,000.00 (Two Hundred and Fifteen Thousand Naira only) being the Claimant’s End Year Bonus for 2013 as approved by the Defendant's management on the 21<sup>st</sup> day of November 2013, at a time when the claimant is still a staff. The Defendant refused to pay this money to the Claimant in a bid to punish him for no cause. <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""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">Counsel submitted with respect to issue five that the law is trite that where there is a wrong, there is a remedy. The claimant is asking for general damages for the loss, inconveniences and expenditures he has incurred as consequences of the breach of his contract of employment by the Defendant. Having breached the terms and condition of the contract of employment, the Defendant should make good the wrong/loss suffered by the Claimant. In the light of the above, counsel submitted that the court reserves the discretion to award general damages. The law is that the Claimant need not specifically prove general damages or loss he suffered. <b>UAC (NIG) PLC vs. SOBODU (2007) 6 NWLR (Pt. 1030) 368 at 376</b>. Counsel urged the court to grant his claim. <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""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">With respect to issue six, counsel stated that the Claimant filed a Defence to the counter-claim. He submitted that on the Loan Control Form i.e. Exhibit “D6”, deductions were agreed by parties to be made from the claimant’s “MONTHLY SALARIES” and not from his terminal benefit or gratuity. Therefore, the defendant cannot go outside the parties’ agreement to do what it pleases with the claimant’s terminal entitlements. See <b>UGOGWU vs. OKI </b><b>(1990) NWLR (Pt. 153) 721 at 736</b>.<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"">EXHIBITS A and L which provides for the terms and conditions of the employment did not in any way, express or implied empower or authorize any party to deduct loan form terminal benefit or to withhold payment of same. Owing to the fact, it is not expressly stated in the terms and conditions of service, it is therefore deemed to be expressly excluded and therefore extrinsic meaning or provision cannot be imported into it. See <b>IDUFUEKO vs. PFIZER PROD. LTD (supra)</b>.<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""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">Another point made by Counsel with respect to the amount claimed against the claimant by the Defendant is that after the defendant had collected the whole money due to the Claimant, the Defendant cannot ask the court for the same claim. Counsel contended that the only thing left is for the Defendant to show this court evidence of how it paid the balance to the Claimant as it claimed above. This it has failed to prove. The Defendant cannot approbate and approbate at the same time. Exhibit L referred to in para 8.4 of the Defendant's final written address does not apply in the present case because it only refers to a case of Resignation or Retirement. Counsel urged the court to hold that the defendant failed to prove its Counter-Claim against the Claimant. In conclusion, counsel urged the court to hold that the Claimant is entitled to his claims. <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">On 15/4/2016, the defendant filed a Reply on points of law, in which he submitted that it is settled law that admissibility of documentary evidence is governed by three main criteria namely: <i><o:p></o:p></i></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"> (a) Is the document pleaded?<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"> (b) Is it relevant to the inquiry being tried by the Court? <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"> (c) Is it admissible in law? <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">See <b>CHEVRON (NIG) LTD. vs. ADERIBIGBE (2012) 4 NWLR (Pt. 1289) 1 at 12 -13</b>.<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 submitted that the Defendant actually met and fulfilled the first criteria laid down in the above mentioned case. The Defendant pleaded the said Exhibit "D10" in paragraph 6 of its Amended Statement of Defence and the DW1 led evidence in proof of the pleaded facts vide paragraph 6 of his Witness Statement on Oath. Counsel further submitted that contrary to the Claimant Counsel's submission that Exhibit "D10" is not relevant to the facts in issue in this case, Section 84(4) of the Evidence Act, 2011 had made same statutorily relevant. The Section provides as follows: “in any proceedings where it is desired to give a statement by virtue of this section, a certificate --- shall be evidence of the matter stated in the certificate, and for the purpose of this subsection it shall be sufficient for a matter to be stated to the best of the knowledge and belief of the person stating it”.<i> <o:p></o:p></i></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 submission that the word <i>“</i>shall<i>” </i>used in the above-mentioned section, is used in a "mandatory" and not in a "permissive" sense thereby making the "Computer Certificate" (Exhibit D10) a relevant document that must be produced by a party wishing to rely on statements in documents produced by computers in evidence as expressly provided by Section 84 of the Evidence Act, 2011.<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"> </span><span style="font-size:4.0pt; 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">Counsel argued that it is settled law that a fact necessary to explain or introduce a fact in issue or relevant fact is deemed a relevant fact. See Section 7 (a) of the Evidence Act, 2011. Counsel submitted further that Exhibit "D10" is made relevant by the fact that it introduced a fact in issue or relevant fact in view of the fact that it is aimed at introducing the e-mail exchanges between the Claimant and the Defendant's Industrial and Labour Relations Executive, Mr. N. Umeonyido dated 6<sup>th</sup> November, 2009 and 16<sup>th</sup> November, 2009 respectively and the e-mail exchanges between Mr. Abayomi Akeem Aderemi, Mr. Derrill Moss, Defendant's General Manager Operations, dated 5<sup>th</sup> August 2011 and between Mr. N. Aniemeka Umeonyido and the Claimant dated 8<sup>th</sup> August, 2011. The Defendant's General Ledger for Senior Staff Loan and Upfront Housing Loans Balance and the Payment and Emolument Slips of the Claimant while in the employ of the Defendant; being a relevant fact produced by the Defendant in proof of its case that the Claimant was issued queries and written warnings for acts of indiscipline, the fact that the Claimant applied and received Senior Staff Loan and Upfront Housing Loan and that from the Pay and Emolument Slips of the Claimant, deductions were made therefore to repay those Loans. <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">In summation, Counsel submitted that by the provisions of Section 84 of the Evidence Act, 2011, particularly Subsection 4, 'Computer Certificate' which Exhibit D10 is relevant to the facts in issue which are sought to be established or disputed by Exhibits D1, D2, D7 and D8. Counsel urged the Court to resolve this issue against the Claimant and hold on the basis of the foregoing submissions that Exhibit D10 is relevant to the determination of the facts in issue in this case and, therefore, admissible in evidence in this suit. Again, counsel contended that it is not mandatory in law that a document must be tendered through its maker. The Court of Appeal in the case of <b>OBEMBE vs. EKELE (2001) 10 NWLR (PT. 722) P. 677 @ 693, PARAS F-H ANO 693- 694, PARAS. H - A</b> held thus: <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-font-width: 110%;mso-bidi-language:HE">"It is not mandatory that </span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-font-width: 108%;mso-bidi-language:HE">a </span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";mso-font-width:110%;mso-bidi-language:HE">document must be tendered through the maker. The Court may admit </span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-font-width: 108%;mso-bidi-language:HE">a </span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";mso-font-width:110%;mso-bidi-language:HE">document in evidence, even if the maker is available but not called </span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-font-width: 106%;mso-bidi-language:HE">as a </span><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-font-width:110%;mso-bidi-language: HE">witness" <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">Counsel submitted that the competence of a witness to tender evidence in a case is different from the weight to be attached to the evidence. See <b>OBEMBE vs. EKELE (supra), at 691– 692</b>. Counsel urged the Court to hold that Exhibit D10<b> </b>is relevant and admissible. Furthermore, counsel argued that the law as set down by the Supreme Court in <b>KATE ENTERPRISES LTD vs. DAEWOO NIG. LTD (SUPRA) </b>is absolute in its application as it relates to the competence of a witness called by a company to give oral evidence or tender documents in proof of the case of the company. He further submitted that to uphold the Claimant Counsel's submission in respect of this issue is a tacit way of denying a juristic person like the Defendant in this case, the opportunity to produce evidence in support of its case on the ground that the maker of the document was not called as a witness, even where he is in the employ of the company or where he had left the company's employment. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:4.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size:8.0pt;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 repeated his argument in his address that Exhibit D10 falls under the exception to the operation of Section 83(3) of the Evidence Act, 2011. He submitted that the constitution and Section 84(1) and (4), could not have conceived or envisaged a situation where either of the Claimant or the Defendant should produce a computer Certificate in advance or in anticipation of a dispute or a suit. Whereas it may be possible for the Claimant to comply with the provisions of Section 83(3) of the Evidence Act, 2011 at the point of filing his action in court by producing a Computer Certificate where he intends to rely on statements in documents produced by computers, it is rather impossible for the Defendant to comply with the provisions of Section 83(3) of the Evidence Act, 2011 by filing a Computer Certificate in fulfilment of Section 84(4) of the Evidence Act, 2011 where, as in the present case, the Defendant intends to rely on statements in documents produced by its computers. The appropriate and applicable maxim for situations like this is the law does not compel a person to do that which he or she cannot possibly perform. Counsel urged the Court to hold on the strength of the submissions made above that Exhibit D10 is relevant and admissible. <i><o:p></o:p></i></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">Again, Counsel reechoed his submission that the law is that pleadings without oral evidence or in the present dispensation of frontloading of court process, a sworn and adopted Witness Statement on Oath is nothing but a mere allegation requiring additional proof. See <b>AREGBESOLA vs. OYINLOLA (SUPRA)</b>. Counsel referred to the case of <b>SPLINTER (NIG) LTD vs. OASIS FINACE LTD (SUPRA) at 227, PARAS. D-F AND 226-227, PARAS.H-B</b> held thus: <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;mso-bidi-font-style:italic">“A witness statement on oath, not having been duly adopted based on an abandoned statement </span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-bidi-language:HE">of defence cannot be relevant to the level of affidavit evidence or any evidence at all. In the instant case, the contention of counsel for the appellants that the appellants witness statement on Oath, which was not adopted by the witness, was evidence before the trial Court, was misconceived” <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"> <i> <o:p></o:p></i></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 urged the Court to discountenance the Claimant Counsel's submissions in respect of this issue and hold that the Claimant's Reply to the Defendant's Amended Statement of Defence and Counter-Claim without a sworn and adopted fresh or further Witness Statement on Oath encompassing the facts/allegations contained amounts to no evidence which the Court can rely on to determine the issues submitted by parties to it for determination. Further, counsel submitted that that it is the duty of the party relying on a document to produce credible and admissible oral evidence in support of the documents sought to be relied on. It is not the duty of the Court in our adversarial judicial system to tie each document tendered in evidence to specific aspects of a party's case. In other words, a document cannot serve any useful purpose in the absence of oral evidence explaining its essence or purpose. This much was decided in this line of cases. Counsel referred to the case to <b>UCHA vs. ELECHI (2012) 13 NWLR (Pt. 1317) P. 330 at 360, PARAS. E-G 367- 368, PARAS. H-A</b> where the Supreme Court held as follows: <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-font-width: 110%;mso-bidi-language:HE;mso-bidi-font-style:italic">"Where </span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-language: HE">a party decides to rely on documents to prove his case, there must be a link between the document and the specific area(s) of the petition. He must relate each document to the specific area of his case for which the document is tendered. No Court would spend judicial time linking documents to specific area of a party's case. It is not the duty of the Court to embark upon cloistered justice by making enquiry into the case in chambers by examination of documents which were in evidence but not demonstrated by witness before the Court. A judge is an adjudicator and not an investigator.” <i><o:p></o:p></i></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">Similarly, he also cited the case of <b>ABI vs.CBN (2012) 3 NWLR (Pt. 1286) P. 1 @ 28, PARAS.F-H</b>, where the Court of Appeal held thus: <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-font-width: 110%;mso-bidi-language:HE;mso-bidi-font-style:italic">"Documents are not objects that can be subjected </span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-language:HE">to cross-examination when tendered and admitted in evidence. The usefulness of a document would not be of much assistance to the trial Court in the absence of admissible oral evidence by a person who can explain the object for which the document is tendered. In other words, the object for which a document must be linked to the point being made in oral evidence in support of a case" <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">See also <b>TUNJI vs. BAMIDELE (2012) 12 NWLR (Pt. 1315) P. 477 @ 491-492, PARAS.G-B and 492. PARA. C</b>. In the instant case, counsel contended that it is indubitable that the Claimant has failed or neglected to produce admissible oral evidence by way of a sworn and adopted fresh or further Witness Statement on Oath encompassing the averments and documents pleaded in the Claimant's purported Reply to the Defendant's Amended Statement of Defence and Counter-Claim, and by so doing the Claimant has failed or neglected to provide admissible oral evidence to tie each of the exhibits filed in it to any specific area of his case, neither did the Claimant in his evidence demonstrate the said exhibits. <i><o:p></o:p></i></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 urged the Court to hold that the Claimant's Reply to the Defendant's Statement of Defence is not supported with admissible evidence in proof of the facts/allegations it seek to establish, as the Claimant have failed or neglected to furnish the Court with evidence in proof of those facts by failing to file, swear and adopt a fresh or further Witness Statement on Oath encompassing the facts contained therein. He also urged the court to hold that the exhibits contained in the Claimant's purported Reply to the Defendant's Statement of Defence and Counter-Claim is worthless and of no judicial moment for the failure and neglect of the Claimant to furnish the court with credible and admissible evidence in support of or explaining or tying those exhibits to any specific area of his case. <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">In response to the part B of the Claimant’s final address, counsel submitted that the Claimant failed to furnish the court with credible and admissible evidence, including the criteria laid down by the National Joint Industrial Council Agreement for the calculation of the severance of benefits of a senior staff in proof of how he arrived at the calculated sum of <s>N</s>10 Million as severance benefit. Counsel referred to his submissions in paragraphs 6.0 - 6.5 of his Final Written Address to the effect that the Claimant failed to furnish the court with credible and admissible evidence in proof severance or terminal benefits being an unfixed sum, the Claimant has failed to specifically plead and prove particulars of how he arrived at the sum being claimed as severance benefits in this case. Thus, counsel urged the court to hold that the Claimant has woefully failed to prove his claim and refuse same for want of evidence. See <b>A.G FEDERATION vs. A.G ABIA STATE (NO.2) (2002) 6 NWLR (Pt.764) 742.</b><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 submitted that it is settled law that the court will not grant a relief that is vague and which lacks certainty. Salaries, emoluments, allowances and other benefits accruing to an office are in the nature of special damages for which strict proof is required. See <b>ALAO vs. UNILORIN (2008) 1 NWLR (PT. 1069) 421 at 466, PARAS. F-G</b>. Counsel submitted that the Claimant's claim for severance benefits calculated on the criteria laid down in the Joint Industrial Council Agreement falls within the realm of special damages for which strict proof is required. Counsel urged the court to hold on the foregoing submissions that the Claimants claim for severance benefits was not supported with credible evidence of the highest probative value and weight in strict proof of the special damages which it is and that the Claimant's claim for severance benefits is vague, uncertain and lacking in material particulars and as such must fail. <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">Furthermore, counsel submitted that the contextual application of the word 'legitimate entitlements' or 'lawful entitlements' as it relates to the 'entitlements' of an employer, as in this case, the Claimant's 'legitimate entitlements' in his contract of service with the Defendant, is, the actual entitlements provided in the Claimant's contract of service with the Defendant. This is against the background that terms of a contract (including contract of service) which defines the rights and obligations of the parties, are either made orally or expressly provided in a written agreement, hence, the law that parties are bound by the terms and conditions of their contract. Counsel submitted further that a cursory and in-depth look at Exhibits A and L reveal that 'End Year Bonus' was never contemplated by the parties as one of the Claimant's legitimate entitlements under his contract of service with the Defendant which the Claimant can claim as of right or one which is not subject to the unfettered discretion and whims of the Defendant. Counsel urged the Court on the basis of the foregoing submissions to discountenance the Claimant Counsel's submissions in respect of this issue as being unfounded with the extant law on this issue and resolve the same in favour of the Defendant. <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 Claimant Counsel's construction of the Defendant Solicitors' letter (Exhibit D5) is misconceived and misleading as the paragraph 5 of the said Exhibit D5 provided a succinct history and the current status of the matter. At the material date of authorship of Exhibit D5, the Claimant was still indebted to the Defendant to the tune of <s>N</s>1,091,166.67 (One Million, Ninety-One Thousand, One Hundred and Sixty-Six Naira, Sixty-Seven Kobo) being and representing the outstanding balance of the Car Loan (Senior Staff Loan) and Upfront Housing Loan. Counsel submitted further that in the interpretation of a document, due regard should be given to the entire document so as to find the correct meaning of words used in relation to the issue at hand. See Section 258 of the Evidence Act, 2011. See also the cases of <b>ARTRA INDUSTRIES (NIG.) </b></span><b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"">LIMITED vs. N.B.C.I. (1998) 4 NWLR (Pt. 546) 357 at 375, PARA. C</span></b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">. It is counsel’s argument that a holistic interpretation and construction of Exhibit D5 in their plain and ordinary meaning would reveal that the Defendant did not admit that the Claimant was not indebted to it.<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"">It is the law that for the content of a document to amount to an admission, the statements contained therein must be direct, positive and unequivocal. See <b>EIGBE vs. N.U.T. (2008) 5 NWLR (Pt.1081) 604 at 632</b>. It is counsel’s opinion that Exhibit D5 was not the only evidence the Defendant produced in proof of its Counter-Claim and relief in paragraph 8 (a) of the Defendant's Counter-Claim. Also, the Defendant in the discharge of its burden of proving that the Claimant was still in indebted to the Defendant, the DW1 led evidence vide paragraphs 14-22 of the DW1's Witness Statement on Oath and tendered Exhibits D6 and D7. The evidence of DW l was not discredited under cross-examination by the Claimant's Counsel and neither did the Claimant make any averment in rebuttal of this fact in issue either in the Claimant's Statement of Facts or in his Reply to the Defendant's Amended Statement of Defence and Counter-Claim. </span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-language: HE">Apart from Exhibit D5, the Claimant as CW1 admitted under cross-examination that he was still indebted to the Defendant to the tune of <s>N</s>1,091,166.67 (One Million, Ninety-One Thousand, One Hundred and Sixty-Six Naira, Sixty- Seven Kobo) in respect of the Car Loan (Senior Staff Loan) and Upfront Housing Loan advanced to him by the Defendant while he was in the Defendant's employment. The law is that evidence elicited under cross-examination of a defence witness, as in the instant case, where the Claimant is the Defendant to the Counter-claim, need no further proof. In the same vein, counsel submitted that the Claimant's admission in Exhibit D9 should equally be held to be relevant and admissible evidence in proof of the Defendant's claim in paragraph 8 (a) of its Counter-Claim See <b>ADEOSUN vs. GOVERNOR OF EKITI STATE (2012) 4 NWLR (Pt. 1291) 581 at 602</b> and <b>DAGGASH vs. BULAMA (2004) 14 NWLR (Pt. 892) 144 at 241</b>. </span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""><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 basis of the foregoing submissions, counsel urged this Court to resolve the issue raised above in the negative by holding that Exhibit D5 does not disprove the fact that the Claimant is still indebted to the Defendant to the tune of <s>N</s>1,091,166.67 (One Million, Ninety-One Thousand, One Hundred and Sixty-Six Naira, Sixty-Seven Kobo) being and representing the outstanding balance of the Car Loan (Senior Staff Loan) and Upfront Housing Loan in the light of other evidence of admission by the Claimant of his indebtedness to the Defendant in respect of the Car Loan (Senior Staff Loan) and Upfront Housing Loan advanced to him by the Defendant. <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">In conclusion, counsel submitted that the Claimant has failed in all material respects to prove his case. Counsel urged the Court to dismiss the Claimant's Claim in its entirety for being baseless, frivolous, gold digging and an abuse of the process of the Court and award substantial cost against the Claimant. Counsel also urged the Court to hold that the Defendant has proven its Counter-Claim against the Claimant and accordingly grant the Defendant's Counter-Claim.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing"><span style="font-size:4.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-bidi-language:HE"> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:2.5in;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;">Having heard from the learned counsels to the parties, let me now consider this case. The starting point will be to examine the facts of the case. The claimant opened his case on 10<sup>th</sup> December 2014 and testified as the only witness in his case. The facts of his case as stated by him in his witness statement adopted on that day are that he was employed by the Defendant vide a letter of employment dated 17<sup>th</sup> June, 2009. He started work as a Yard/Ops Report Clerk and later rose to become a senior staff of the Defendant. As a result of his excellent performances and diligence, he was promoted several times up to the position of Shift Manager which was his last position. During his employment with the Defendant, he was never queried, suspended nor issued any warning by the Defendant. He was even nominated for a course in Dubai and in the Kingdom of Bahrain as a result of his performance. On 27<sup>th</sup> November 2013, without any reason, the defendant terminated his employment vide the letter admitted in evidence as Exhibit B. By the terms of his employment as contained in his employment letter, he was entitled to one month’s written notice of termination of his employment or payment of one (1) month's salary in lieu of notice but the defendant did not give him one month notice nor paid him one month salary in lieu of notice. Prior to the termination of his employment, the Defendant had approved the payment of the sum of <s>N</s>215, 000.00 to him as year-end bonus for the year 2013 but the Defendant has failed to pay him the said bonus. The Claimant contended that the termination of his employment was unlawful, without justification and has caused him inconveniences and loss.<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;">The Defendant's case as narrated by DW1, the General Manager, Human Resources Development of the defendant, is that the claimant was employed by the defendant on 17<sup>th</sup> June 2009 and terminated on 27<sup>th</sup> November 2013. During his employment, the claimant was queried as evidenced in the emails dated 6<sup>th</sup> November 2009, 16<sup>th</sup> November 2009, 5<sup>th</sup> August 2011 and 8<sup>th</sup> August 2011. The Defendant lawfully terminated the claimant’s employment on 27<sup>th</sup> November 2015 in accordance with the terms and conditions of his employment as contained in the claimant’s employment letter and the defendant’s handbook. Although the claimant was to be paid one month salary in lieu of notice, the defendant did not pay it to him because as at the date of the claimant’s termination, he was indebted to the defendant to the tune of <s>N</s>1,091,667.67. This debt arose from the outstanding balance of the Car loan (Senior Staff Load) and Upfront Housing Loan the Defendant advanced to the Claimant but which the claimant did not fully repay before the termination of his employment. Under the loan agreement, the repayment of the loan was to be deducted from the claimant’s monthly salaries or his final entitlements in the event that he left the defendant’s employment. The claimant executed loan control form and undertaking form dated 28<sup>th</sup> August 2012 and 25<sup>th</sup> March 2013 respectively. At the time of termination of the claimant’s employment, he had only paid <s>N</s>625,000.00 from the car loan and <s>N</s>433,333.00 from the Housing loan. This leaves outstanding balances of <s>N</s>875,000.00 and <s>N</s>216,166.67 respectively from the car loan and housing loan to be paid to the defendant. The total indebtedness of the claimant to the Defendant stands at the sum of <s>N</s>1,091,166.67. DW1 also stated that the Claimant is not entitled to the end of year bonus of <s>N</s>215,00.00 because year-End/Christmas bonus does not constitute part of the entitlements of employees but only paid at the discretion of the Defendant to persons in the employment of the defendant at the end of each business year ending on 31<sup>st </sup>December of each year.<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;">In determining this case, the issues which in my view arise from the facts for determination are:<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">1. Whether the termination of the claimant’s employment was wrongful. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">2. Whether the claimant is entitled to the reliefs he sought.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">3. Whether the defendant is entitled to the counter claim.<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;">Before I proceed to examine the issues, I will quickly rule on the objection of the claimant’s counsel to the admissibility of document which is in evidence as Exhibit D10. The arguments on the admissibility of the document were taken on 13/7/2015 but I reserved ruling till judgment. The counsels to the parties further addressed the court on the admissibility of the document in their final written addresses. I have considered the arguments of the learned counsels and I totally agree with the defendant’s counsel, on all the reasons he advanced, that the document is admissible in evidence. Furthermore, the objection of the claimant’s counsel to the admissibility of the Exhibit is hinged on the provisions of the Evidence Act. Let me mention it here that this court is more interested in doing substantial justice than dwell on technical matters. Section 12 (2) of the National Industrial Court Act has permitted this court to depart from the provisions of the Evidence Act where the interest of justice so demands. I have examined the document and I find that it is pleaded, it is relevant and it is in an admissible form. The claimant’s objection to the admissibility of Exhibit D10 is overruled. <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"><b><u><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">ISSUE ONE:<o:p></o:p></span></u></b></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-font-width:111%">The first claim of the claimant is for a</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> declaration that the termination of his employment by the defendant is unlawful and illegal. His basis for this claim is contained in paragraphs 10, 11 and 12 of statement of facts when the claimant said the defendant terminated his employment on 27<sup>th</sup> November 2013 without any reason. Although the terms of his employment as contained in his employment letter is that he was entitled to one month’s written notice of termination of his employment or payment of one (1) month's salary in lieu of notice, the defendant did not give him one month notice nor paid him one month salary in lieu of notice. It was in view of these facts the claimant contended that the termination of his employment was wrongful, unlawful and contrary to the terms of his employment. The defendant on the other hand averred in paragraph 8 of its amended Statement of Defence and Counter Claim that the Claimant<span style="color:#5B605D">'</span>s contract of employment was lawfully terminated on 27<sup>th</sup> November, 2013 in line with the claimant's terms of employment as contained in his employment letter and the defendant's Employee Handbook.<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-font-width:108%;mso-bidi-font-style: italic"> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-font-width:111%">In master and servant relationship, as in this case, it is a general rule that both parties thereto have the right to terminate the contract whether for good, for bad or for no reason at all. But where in the employment contract a procedure is provided for termination of the contract, none compliance with that procedure renders the termination wrongful and the defaulting party will be liable to pay damages. See </span><b><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">EZE vs. SPRING BANK PLC (</span></b><b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">2012) All FWLR (Pt. 609) 1076; UZONDU vs. U.B.N PLC (2008) All FWLR (Pt. 443) 1389 at 1440-1441</span></b><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">; <b>TEXACO NIG. PLC vs. KEHINDE (2002) FWLR (Pt. 94) 143</b></span><b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"">. </span></b><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-font-width:111%">In this case, the claimant pleaded that the termination of his employment was not in accordance with the </span><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">terms of his employment as contained in his employment letter. He tendered the employment letter in evidence as Exhibit A. The claimant also put the defendant’s condition of service, which is the Employee Handbook, in evidence and it was marked Exhibit L. In the claimant’s employment letter, the procedure for termination of the employment was spelt out in paragraph 12 (f) follows<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify"><b><i><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">“on or after completion of your probationary period, either party giving one (1) month's written notice of termination or payment of one (1) month's salary in lieu thereof may make termination of your employment relationship established by this letter of appointment". <o:p></o:p></span></i></b></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;">In the Employee Handbook, the procedure for termination of the employment was stated at paragraph 4.3 at page 22 thus:<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify"><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">“<b><i>“On or after completion of your probationary period, termination of employment relationship established by the employee’s letter of appointment may be made by either party giving one (1) month's written notice of termination or payment of one (1) month's salary in lieu thereof”.<o:p></o:p></i></b></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:4.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-font-width:111%"> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">In both the employment letter and the handbook, the condition of service is that one month's written notice of termination or payment of one month's salary in lieu must be given to terminate employment. The question therefore is: W</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-font-width:111%">as the procedure followed when the claimant’s employment was terminated? The letter communicating the claimant’s termination, that is Exhibit B, was dated 27<sup>th</sup> November 2013 and it contains in the 1<sup>st</sup> paragraph that: <b><i>“We regret to inform you that your services are no longer required by West Africa Container Terminal Limited, Onne, with effect from November 27, 2013”.</i></b> From this content of the termination letter, the claimant’s employment was terminated the very the day the letter was given to him. Clearly, one month notice was not given to the claimant before his employment was terminated. In that circumstance, the defendant was required by the contract to pay the claimant one month salary in lieu of notice. It </span><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">appears the Defendant chose the option of payment of one month salary in lieu of notice when it informed the claimant in the 2<sup>nd</sup> paragraph of the termination letter that:<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify"><b><i><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">“As your contract stipulates, we will pay all monies due </span></i></b><b><i><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">to you for the period you have been in our employment, including one month's salary in lieu of notice”. <o:p></o:p></span></i></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"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-font-width:111%">Was that one month salary in lieu of notice paid to the claimant? The claimant’s case is that it has not been paid to him. While the defendant, by the facts pleaded in paragraph 9 of the amended statement of defence and counter claim and in the evidence of DW1, recognizes the claimant’s right to be paid one month salary in lieu of notice, however maintained that the one month salary in lieu of notice was not paid to the claimant because </span><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">as at the date of the claimant’s termination, he was indebted to the defendant to the tune of <s>N</s>1,091,667.67. Under </span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-font-width:111%">cross examination by the claimant’s counsel, DW1 said t</span><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">he claimant was not paid the one month salary in lieu of notice because he did not pay his indebtedness</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-font-width:111%"> to the defendant. It is now quite apparent that the defendant has not paid the one month salary in lieu of notice to the claimant. Its reason is that the claimant is indebted to it. But I observe that the defendant did not say anywhere that it utilized the one month salary to offset the claimant’s debt. Of course, the amount of the debt the defendant alleged to be outstanding since the time of termination of the claimant’s employment has not been shown to have been reduced by the amount of the salary. A different consideration would have applied if the defendant had reduced the alleged debt of the claimant’s by the amount of the salary. In that case, it will be considered that the claimant has been paid. But in this case where the defendant merely withheld the salary, the implication is that the claimant has not been paid the one month salary to which he was entitled in lieu of notice of termination.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing"><span style="font-size:4.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-font-width:111%"> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">The defendant’s counsel has argued that the defendant exercised it right under the Employee Handbook, Exhibit L, </span><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">to withhold the payment of the one month's salary in lieu of notice to the claimant pending the discharge of the claimant's outstanding indebtedness to the Defendant. Let me point it out that there is no such provision in the Handbook which permits the defendant to withhold the salary in lieu of notice to be paid to the claimant. Paragraph 5 of Article 5.4 of the handbook relied on by the defendant’s counsel provide thus: “<b><i>In the case </i>of <i><u>resignation/retirement</u>, any amounts outstanding will be deducted from <u>terminal benefit</u> payable to the affected staff". </i></b>The right granted to the defendant in this provision relates to instances of resignation or retirement and payment of terminal benefits. In this case, the circumstance of the claimant is the termination of his employment and the payment involved is salary in lieu of notice and not terminal benefits. The defendant’s counsel also quoted the 3<sup>rd</sup> paragraph of the termination letter where the claimant was notified to pay his debts before his severance package can be paid to argue that the payment of his debt was a condition precedent to receiving the salary in lieu of notice. I must also point it out to counsel that</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-font-width:111%"> salary in lieu of notice is not terminal benefits or severance package as to be affected by the provision in Exhibit L or directive in Exhibit B. Salary in lieu of notice is itself a termination procedure. Non-payment of same or withholding payment will occasion an improper or wrongful termination of the employment. In this instance, the defendant having elected to terminate the contract by giving one month salary in lieu of notice was bound to pay it for there to be proper termination of the contract. It is only after the employment has been validly terminated by either notice or payment of salary in lieu that the issue of terminal benefits or severance package can arise.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing"><span style="font-size:4.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-font-width:111%"> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-font-width:111%">I find from the foregoing that the defendant neither gave one month notice of termination to the claimant nor did it pay one month salary in lieu of notice to the claimant. The claimant’s contract was not determined in accordance with the contract. The termination of the claimant’s employment is therefore wrongful and I so declare.<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"><b><u><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">ISSUE TWO<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;">The claimant has sought various monetary claims. For purposes of evaluation, they are repeated hereunder:<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.75in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in;mso-list:l4 level1 lfo7"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-size: 12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"">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"">The payment of the Claimant<span style="color:#515554">'</span>s severance benefits to the tune of <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify"><s><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"">N</span></s><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">10<span style="color:#515554">,</span>000<span style="color:#515554">,</span>000<span style="color:#515554">.</span>00 (Ten Million Naira) calculated fairly as a Senior Staff of the Defendant. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.75in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in;mso-list:l4 level1 lfo7"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-size: 12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"">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"">The payment of the Claimant<span style="color:#515554">'</span>s one month salary in lieu of notice as stipulated <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"">in the Claimant's letter of termination. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.75in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in;mso-list:l4 level1 lfo7"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-size: 12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"">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"">The payment of the sum of <s>N</s>215<span style="color:#6C6F70">,</span>000.00 <span style="color:#515554">(</span>Two Hundred and Fifteen Thousand <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"">Naira) being the Claimant<span style="color:#515554">'</span>s year-end bonus for 2013 app<span style="color:#515554">r</span>oved by the Defendant's management.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.75in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in;mso-list:l4 level1 lfo7"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-size: 12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"">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"">The sum of <s>N</s>5<span style="color:#515554">,</span>000<span style="color:#6C6F70">,</span>000<span style="color:#6C6F70">.</span>00 (Five Million Na<span style="color:#515554">i</span>ra<span style="color:#515554">) </span>as general damages fo<span style="color:#515554">r </span>the loss<span style="color:#515554">, </span><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"">inconvenience and expenditure for breach of contract of employment. <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;">I will consider these claims to see if the claimant is entitled to any or all of them. <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:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">The claimant has sought that the one month salary in lieu of notice be paid to him. From all I have said in issue one of this judgment and my findings therein, it need not be emphasized again that the claimant is entitled to be paid the one month salary in lieu of notice.<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""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">Related to the above claim is the claimant’s claim for the payment of </span><s><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">N</span></s><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">5,000,000.00 as general damages for </span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">loss<span style="color:#515554">, </span>inconvenience and breach of contract of employment. Let me mention that the nature of general damages sought by the claimant in this case is not grantable in an action between master and servant. It is now trite that an employee cannot be awarded general damages in an action between him and his master. See<b> P.Z & CO. LTD vs. OGEDENGBE (1972) All NLR 206 at 210; PIONEER MILLING CO. LTD. vs. NANSING (2003) FWLR (Pt. 151) 1820 at 1827-1828. </b>Although the claimant is entitled to damages for wrongful termination of his employment, the measure of damages is the salary in lieu of the notice which the defendant would have given to terminate the employment. </span><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">Se<b>e ISIEVWORE vs. N.E.P.A.</b></span><b><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;"> (2002) FWLR (Pt. 124) 398</span></b><b><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">; IFETA vs. S.P.D.C. (2006) All FWLR (Pt. 314) 305. </span></b><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">Therefore, the sum sought by the claimant as general damages cannot be granted. What he is entitled to as damages is the same one month salary in lieu of notice this court has already found for him. </span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">I am however unable to determine what the claimant’s one month salary amounts to. The claimant did not plead or state anywhere what his annual or monthly salary was as the time of termination of his employment. The defendant too was silent on this. As it is, I cannot make any pronouncement as to a specific sum of money due to the claimant as his one month salary in lieu of notice. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify;tab-stops:50.25pt"><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;">The claimant also sought the payment of the sum of <s>N</s>215,000.00 which he said was his year-end bonus for 2013 as approved by the Defendant's management. In his evidence, the claimant said prior to the termination of his employment, the Defendant had approved the payment of the sum of </span><s><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">N</span></s><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">215,000.00 to him as year-end bonus for the year 2013 but the Defendant has failed to pay him the said bonus. The claimant relied on Exhibit F as his basis for the claim. The exhibit is an E-mail message sent to some individuals including the claimant on 21<sup>st</sup> November 2013 informing them that <b><i>“Management approved the sum of Two Hundred and Fifteen Thousand Naira (</i></b></span><b><i><s><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"">N</span></s></i></b><b><i><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">215,000.00) each, as year-end bonus (NO X-MAS GIFTS). This will be credited to your respective accounts before the last day in November”.</span></i></b><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;"> Under cross examination by the defendant’s counsel, the claimant said further that he was one of the persons Exhibit F was addressed to. As at 30<sup>th</sup> November 2013 when the bonuses were paid, he was no longer an employee of the defendant as his employment has been terminated on 27<sup>th</sup> November 2013. Although end of year bonuses are not paid to people who are not employees of the defendant, he has earned the bonus because he worked for up till 27<sup>th</sup> November 2013. The defendant however averred that the claimant is not entitled to the sum because it is not part of his entitlement. In his evidence DW1 stated that the Claimant is not entitled to the end of year bonus of </span><s><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">N</span></s><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">215,00.00 because year-End /Christmas bonus does not constitute part of the entitlements of employees but only paid at the discretion of the Defendant to persons in the employment of the defendant at the end of each business year ending on 31<sup>st </sup>December of each year. When he was cross examined by the claimants counsel, DW1 said that Exhibit F was sent to the claimant on 21<sup>st</sup> November 2013 but before payment, he ceased to be an employee of the defendant that was why he was not paid. DW1 also said the claimant worked from January 2013 to 27<sup>th</sup> November 2013 and the end of year bonus is paid to staff at the discretion of the defendant.</span><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""><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;">After examining these facts, the following became clear:<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.75in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in;mso-list:l6 level1 lfo8"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">i.<span style="font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">The defendant informed the claimant on 21<sup>st</sup> November 2013 vide Exhibit F <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.25in;text-align:justify;text-indent: .25in"><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">that he will be paid end of year bonus for 2013 in the sum of </span><s><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"">N</span></s><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">215,000.00.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.75in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in;mso-list:l6 level1 lfo8"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">ii.<span style="font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">The end of year bonus for 2013 was to be paid on or before 31<sup>st</sup> November <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.25in;text-align:justify;text-indent: .25in"><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">2013.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.75in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in;mso-list:l6 level1 lfo8"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">iii.<span style="font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">The claimant’s employment was terminated on 27<sup>th</sup> November 2013 before the <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.25in;text-align:justify;text-indent: .25in"><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">time for payment of the bonus.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.75in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in;mso-list:l6 level1 lfo8"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">iv.<span style="font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">The claimant was not paid the 2013 year-end bonus of </span><s><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"">N</span></s><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">215,000.00.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify;tab-stops:50.25pt"><span style="font-size: 4pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;"> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify;tab-stops:50.25pt"><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">The claimant was in the defendant’s employment from November 2012 to November 27, 2013. The defendant on 21<sup>st</sup> November 2013 informed the claimant that he was entitled to the year-end bonus for that year. Three days to the payment of the bonus, the claimant’s employment was terminated. The defendant having held out the bonus to the claimant, cannot, in good conscience, be allowed to withhold it. This is even more so that the claimant was in the defendant’s employment as at the time the defendant considered the claimant to be entitled to the bonus. The defendant’s position is that the claimant was not entitled to the bonus because the claimant was no longer in the defendant’s employment when the bonus was paid. Besides that I cannot find any justification in this standpoint, the fact that the claimant was not in the defendant’s employment at the time the bonus was paid does not matter. What matters is the fact that the claimant worked for the defendant 3 days less to the end of the business year and the offer to pay the bonus was made to the claimant when he was in the defendant’s employment. I find this fact to be the position in this case. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify;tab-stops:50.25pt"><span style="font-size: 4pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;"> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify;tab-stops:50.25pt"><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">The defendant’s counsel expressed the view also, in his written address, that the claimant is not entitled to the year-end bonus because it was not provided in the terms of the employment. It should be pointed out that the claimant’s claim for 2013 year-end bonus is based on Exhibit F and not on the terms of the employment or condition of service. The terms of the employment cannot therefore be used to consider the claimant’s entitlement to the claim. In any case, the DW1 admitted under cross examination that Exhibit F was sent to the claimant. The content of Exhibit F created an obligation for which the defendant cannot lightly resile from. The law is that where a person by his words or in writing or by conduct made to another a representation of facts with the intention that it should be acted upon, that person cannot be allowed to turn away from his representation. See <b>CHUKWUMA vs. IFELOYE (2009) All FWLR (Pt. 460) 629; KWARA POLYTECHNIC ILORIN vs. OYEBANJI (2008) All FWLR (Pt. 447) 141</b>. I find that the defendant made representation to the claimant to pay him year-end bonus and by the duration of the claimant’s service before termination of his employment, it is my view that the claimant earned the year-end bonus for 2013. The claimant ought to be paid.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify;tab-stops:50.25pt"><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;">The claimant also sought from the defendant the sum of </span><s><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">N</span></s><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">10,000,000.00 which he said is his severance benefits. The claimant has however failed to lead any evidence to establish this claim. Under cross examination, the claimant said his employment letter made reference to the Employee handbook under which he is entitled to terminal benefits and that his termination letter also contains the he is entitled to terminal benefits. On the strength of this evidence, I went out of my way to examine the provisions of the claimant’s employment letter and the Employee handbook to see if there is any provision made for severance benefits. But I find none. The claimant may have based this claim on the content of the termination letter which requested him to pay his debts and return the defendant’s properties in his possession before his severance package can be paid to him. The termination letter is however silent on what the severance package is and at what rate. Since the claimant is now the one alleging that he is entitled to </span><s><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">N</span></s><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">10,000,000.00 as severance benefits, the burden is on him to prove it. Let me mention that the defendant denied this claim. The claimant has not been able to discharge the burden of proof placed on him in respect of this claim. His evidence under cross examination assisted in clearing the air on how the sum came about. The claimant said the sum of </span><s><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">N</span></s><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">10,000,000.00 was assessed by himself and his counsel jointly and further that he calculated the <s>N</s>10,000,000.00 based on what he saw in the internet. It is clear to me that the claimant merely claims for </span><s><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">N</span></s><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">10,000,000.00 without any iota of fact or evidence to show how he became entitled to the sum or how it accrued. <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;">In conclusion of this issue, I find and hold that reliefs 2 and 5 sought by the claimant on the complaint have no merit while the claimant is entitled to reliefs 3 and 4.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify;tab-stops:50.25pt"><span style="font-size: 4pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;"> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><b><u><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">ISSUE THREE<o:p></o:p></span></u></b></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">I will now consider the defendant’s counter claim. The reliefs sought by the defendant in the amended statement of facts and counter claim against the claimant are the following:<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"">a. The sum of <s>N</s>1<span style="color:#424747">,</span>091,166<span style="color:#424747">.</span>67 (One Million<span style="color:#5A5F61">, </span>Ninety-One Thousand<span style="color:#5A5F61">, </span>Six Hundred and Sixty-Seven Naira<span style="color:#424747">, </span>Sixty-Six Kobo) being the total outstanding balance of the Car loan (Senior Staff Loan) and Upfront Housing Loan which the Defendant advanced to the Claimant at the Claimant<span style="color:#424747">'</span>s request. <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"">b. Interest on the sum of <s>N</s>1<span style="color:#424747">,</span>091<span style="color:#5A5F61">,</span>166.67 (One M<span style="color:#424747">i</span>llion<span style="color:#424747">, </span>Ninety-One Thousand<span style="color:#424747">, </span>Six Hundred and Sixty-Seven Naira<span style="color:#424747">, </span>Sixty-S<span style="color:#424747">i</span>x Kobo) at the rate of 20% per annum from 27th November<span style="color:#424747">, </span>2013 to the date of judgment and thereafter interest at the rate of 10% per annum until the judgment sum is liquidated<span style="color:#6C7574">.<o:p></o:p></span></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.25in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.25in"><span style="font-size:4.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">The facts of the counter claim, as pleaded by the defendant in the amended statement of facts and counter claim, are that the claimant was indebted to the defendant to the tune of <s>N</s>1,091,667.67 at the time of the termination of the claimant’s employment. During his employment, the claimant was granted Car loan of <s>N</s>1,500,000.00 on 12<sup>th</sup> September 2012 and Housing Upfront Loan of <s>N</s>650,000.00 on 12<sup>th</sup> April 2013. The claimant executed loan control form and undertaking form dated 28<sup>th</sup> August 2012 and 25<sup>th</sup> March 2013 respectively, which are in evidence collectively as Exhibit D6, where the claimant agreed that the repayment of the loan was to be deducted from his monthly salaries or his final entitlements in the event that he left the defendant’s employment. At the time of termination of the claimant’s employment, he had only paid <s>N</s>625,000.00 from the car loan and <s>N</s>433,333.00 from the Housing loan. This leaves outstanding balances of <s>N</s>875,000.00 and <s>N</s>216,166.67 respectively from the car loan and housing loan to be paid to the defendant. It was pleaded that the total indebtedness of the claimant to the Defendant stands at the sum of <s>N</s>1,091,166.67. In his evidence in proof of the counter claim, DW1 gave evidence along the same line as the pleaded facts.<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""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">Let me observe at this point that the defendant filed an initial statement of defence and counter claim on 3<sup>rd</sup> October 2014 to which the claimant filed a reply and defence to counter claim on 27<sup>th</sup> November 2014 but deemed filed and served on 10<sup>th</sup> December 2014. The claimant did not accompany the averments in the reply and defence to counter claim with any written statement on oath. By leave of this court granted to the defendant on 13<sup>th</sup> July 2015, the defendant amended its statement of defence and counter claim. The amended statement of defence and counter-claim, together with a fresh deposition of its witness, is dated and filed on 13<sup>th</sup> July 2015. The claimant did not file a consequent reply and defence to the amended statement of defence and counter claim. The initial statement of defence and counter claim to which the claimant filed a reply and defence to counter has been overtaken by the amendment. The claimant’s reply and defence to counter claim can no longer be taken to have traversed the facts in the amended defendant’s processes. The claimant, if he intended to challenge the defendant’s allegations in the amended counter claim, was expected to have filed a defence to the amended counter claim. <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""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">Furthermore, assuming, without not so holding, that the claimant’s said reply and defence to counter claim is a process on record which could be considered, it is my view that the process is deemed abandoned by the claimant in the circumstances of this suit. I have mentioned earlier that the claimant did not file any deposition in respect of the facts averred in the said reply and defence to counter claim. The averments therein are not supported by evidence. It is now settled law that pleadings which are not supported by evidence are deemed by the Court as having been abandoned and they are liable to be struck out. See <b>NEPA vs. ADEBGERO (2003) FWLR (Pt. 139) 1556; I.N.E.C vs. A.C (2009) All FWLR (Pt. 480) 732 at 803; THE ADMINISTRATORS/EXECUTORS OF THE ESTATE OF GENERAL SANI ABACHA vs. EKE-SPIFF (2009) All FWLR (Pt. 467) 1 at 35.</b> The claimant’s counsel has submitted nonetheless that the pleadings in the reply are not without evidence in support. Counsel argued that the documents admitted in evidence as Exhibits C, D, E, I, J, K, and L are the evidence in proof of the averments in the claimant’s reply. The authority of <b>N.N.B. PLC vs. DENCLAG LTD (supra</b>) was relied on by counsel. Although it is conceded to counsel that evidence can be in the form of document, but merely dumping the documents on the court without oral evidence to explain their relevance is as good as the documents were not in evidence. The court cannot be the one to embark on investigating their content or the purpose of the documents. I have examined these exhibits. I find that the claimant did not make any explanation on their purpose in his evidence. It thus means that the claimant only dumped them on the court for the court to carry out investigation on them. The argument the claimant’s counsel canvassed on this point does not hold water.<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;">The Claimant having failed to adduce any evidence to prove the facts in the reply and defence to counter claim is deemed to have abandoned that process. The claimant’s reply to the Statement of Defence and Defence to Counter Claim is therefore an inconsequential process before this court.<b> </b></span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">The consequence of the foregoing is that the facts averred in the amended statement of defence and counter claim have not been traversed or denied. The very obvious implication is that the claimant has admitted the defendant’s counter claim. <b><o:p></o:p></b></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:4.0pt; 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;">Besides the admission of the defendant’s claim as implied by law, the claimant himself has admitted categorically when he was being cross examined by the defendant’s counsel that he is indebted to the defendant. The claimant said the 3<sup>rd</sup> loan advanced to him by the defendant was on 12<sup>th</sup> September 2012 while the 4<sup>th</sup> loan was advanced to him on 12<sup>th</sup> April 2013. The said 3<sup>rd</sup> loan was car loan in the sum of </span><s><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">N</span></s><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">1.5 million while the 4<sup>th</sup> loan was housing upfront in the sum of </span><s><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"">N</span></s><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">650,000.00. As at the time of termination of his employment, he had repaid </span><s><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">N</span></s><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">625,000.00 of the car loan and </span><s><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">N</span></s><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">433,333.00 of the housing upfront. The repayments were deducted from his salaries. The outstanding unpaid car loan is </span><s><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">N</span></s><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">875,000.00 while outstanding unpaid housing loan is </span><s><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">N</span></s><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">2216,166.67 which brings the total owed to the defendant to the sum of </span><s><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"">N</span></s><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">1,091,166.77. He has not paid anything to the defendant since he left the employment. </span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">It is trite that facts admitted need no further proof. See<b> ADUSEI vs. ADEBAYO (2012) 3 NWLR (Pt.1288) 534; REPTICO S.A. GENEVA vs. AFRIBANK (NIG) PLC (2013) 14 NWLR (Pt.1373) 172. </b>From the facts before this court, it is clear that the claimant is indebted to the defendant to the tune of <s>N</s>1,091,166.77. Without further waste of time on this issue, it is my view that the defendant’s counter claim for the sum of <s>N</s>1,091,166.77 is proved. <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;">The defendant also claims for interest at the rate of 20% per annum from 27<sup>th</sup> November, 2013 to the date of judgment and the rate of 10% per annum from date of judgment until the judgment sum is liquidated. My decision on this claim will be at the conclusion of this judgment.<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;">In the final result, it is my judgment that the termination of the claimant’s employment was wrongful and he is consequently entitled to one month salary as damages for the wrongful termination of his employment. He is also entitled to the sum of </span><s><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"">N</span></s><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">215,000.00 being the 2013 year-end bonus. All other reliefs sought by the claimant are dismissed. The defendant’s counter claim for the sum of </span><s><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">N</span></s><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">1,091,166.77</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> succeeds. The defendant’s claim for pre-judgment interest is refused but the claim for post judgment interest at 10% per annum is granted. The amount of the claimant’s one month salary in lieu of notice and the sum of <s>N</s>215,000 will be used by the defendant as part payment of the claimant’s debt. The balance must be paid by the claimant to the defendant within 3 months from the date of this judgment after which it will attract 10% interest per annum until fully paid. No order as to cost.<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;">Judgment is entered accordingly.<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></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;"> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><b><span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Times New Roman", serif;">Hon. Justice O. Y. Anuwe</span></b><span style="font-size: 12pt; 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;">Judge<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-bidi-language:HE"> </span></p>