Download PDF
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><b><u><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">REPRESENTATION:</span></u></b><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">S. U. Madu (Mrs), Assistant Chief Legal Officer, Ministry of Justice, appeared for the Claimant.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">P. Nnamani Esq. appeared for the 1<sup>st</sup> Defendant.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">B. C. Oguine Esq. appeared for the 2<sup>nd</sup> and 3<sup>rd</sup> Defendants.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt; text-align:center;line-height:normal"><b><u><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">JUDGMENT</span></u></b><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">By an amended Statement of Facts dated the 12<sup>th</sup> day of August 2010, the Claimant in this suit claims the following reliefs against the Defendants:<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-add-space:auto;text-align:justify;text-indent:-.25in;line-height:normal; mso-list:l10 level1 lfo4"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-size:14.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"">1.<span style="font-variant-numeric: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">A declaration that the 1<sup>st</sup>Defendant as a Trade Union within the meaning of <b>Section 1(1) of the Trade Unions Act Cap T14, LFN 2004, as amended by the Trade Unions (Amendment) Act No. 17 of 2005,</b> and the 2<sup>nd</sup> and 3<sup>rd</sup>Defendants as Chairman and Secretary of the Enugu State Branch of the 1<sup>st</sup>Defendant (JUSUN Enugu Branch) respectively and all other functionaries of JUSUN Enugu Branch or persons presently acting or who may subsequently act, as such at any time material to this Complaint jointly and severally cannot lawfully give instruction or issue any directives or pass or implement any resolution, or effect any measures or otherwise take any steps of any kind to cause, or instigate, or to compel, encourage or persuade in any other manner, all or any members of JUSUN Enugu Branch, or any other staff of the State Judiciary to embark on any strike/industrial action unless and until after they have first pursued fulfilled, exhausted and otherwise ensured strict compliance with and faithful adherence to all the mandatory procedures/conditions precedent prescribed by all diverse legislation currently in force regulating the calling and settlement of industrial and or labour dispute in Nigeria or as may be otherwise directed by a specific order of Court.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.25in;mso-list:l10 level1 lfo4"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-size: 14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"">2.<span style="font-variant-numeric: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">A declaration that all communiqués hitherto or which may purport to be subsequently issued, by the Defendants or by anybody acting for or on behalf of them, or acting in furtherance of interests, which has the effect of giving, or issuing directives or passing or implementing resolutions, or effecting any measures or otherwise taking any steps of any kind to cause, or instigate, or to compel, encourage, or persuade in any other manner, all or any members of JUSUN Enugu Branch, or any other staff of the State Judiciary, to embark on strike/Industrial Action from Monday, 16<sup>th</sup> August, 2010 or as from any other date, without, first pursuing, fulfilling, exhausting and otherwise ensuring strict compliance with and faithful adherence to all the mandatory procedures/conditions prescribed by all diverse legislations currently in force regulating the calling and settlement of industrial or labour disputes in Nigeria, or obtaining a specific and prior order of Court to that effect are unlawful.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">3 A declaration that the 2<sup>nd</sup> and 3<sup>rd</sup>Defendants and all those they represent in this action, jointly and severally, being people engaged in the provisions of essential service within the meaning of <b>Section 48(1) of the Trade DisputesAct, Cap. T8, L.F.N. 2004,</b> are prohibited from taking part in any strike or engaging in any conduct in contemplation or furtherance of any<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> strike, with consequential effect of withholding or withdrawing themselves from the performance of their usual duties as workers in the Judiciary of Enugu State, or in any other institution within the public service of Enugu State by virtue of the provisions of <b>Section 31(6)(a) of the Trade Unions Act, Cap. T14, L.F.N. 2004 as amended by the Trade Unions (Amendment) Act N. 17 of 2005.<o:p></o:p></b></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">4(A) An order of perpetual injunction restraining the 2<sup>nd</sup> and 3<sup>rd</sup>Defendants and all those they represent in this action, jointly and severally, from taking part in any strike or engaging in any conduct in contemplation or furtherance of any strike with the consequential effect of withholding or withdrawing themselves from the performance of their usual daily job and duties as workers in the Judiciary of Enugu State, or in any other institution within the public service of Enugu State by virtue of the provisions of <b>Section 31(6)(a) of the Trade Unions Act, Cap. T14, L.F.N. 2004 as amended by the Trade Unions (Amendment) Act No. 17 of 2005</b>.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><b><span style="font-size:14.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></b></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><b><span style="font-size:14.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE<o:p></o:p></span></b></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">B(i) An order of perpetual injunction restraining the 1<sup>st</sup> Defendant as a Trade Union within the meaning of Section 1(1) of the Trade Unions Act, Cap. T14, L.F.N. 2004, and the 2<sup>nd</sup> and 3<sup>rd</sup>Defendants as members of the 1<sup>st</sup> Respondent and as chairman and secretary of Enugu State Branch of the 1<sup>st</sup>Defendant (“JUSUN Enugu Branch”) respectively and also restraining all other functionaries of JUSUN Enugu Branch or persons presently acting, or who may subsequently act, as such at any time material to this complaint, jointly and severally, from giving further instructions, or issuing any further directives, or passing or implementing any further resolutions, or from effecting any measure or otherwise from taking any steps or further steps, of any kind to cause, or instigate or to compel, encourage or persuade in any other manner, all or any members of JUSUN Enugu branch or any other staff of the State Judiciary, to carry out the threat of proceeding with and embarking upon strike/Industrial Action from Monday 16<sup>th</sup> August, 2010, or as from any other date, unless and until after they have first pursued, fulfilled, exhausted and otherwise ensured strict compliance with and faithful adherence prescribed by all diverse legislation currently in force regulating the calling and settlement of Industrial and or labour disputes in Nigeria or as may be otherwise directed by a specific order of court.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">AND<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">(ii) An order of perpetual injunction restraining the 2<sup>nd</sup> and 3<sup>rd</sup>Defendants and all those they represent in this action, jointly and severally, from acting upon or acting in compliance with in obedience to, any instructions directives, or resolution, given, issued, passed or taken by the 1<sup>st</sup> respondent or the 2<sup>nd</sup>and 3<sup>rd</sup> respondents or any other person, for any purpose or prospective Industrial Action with consequential effect of withholding or withdrawing themselves from the performance of their usual daily job and duties and also restraining them from carrying out the threat of proceeding with and embarking upon Industrial Action from Monday 16 August 2010, or as from any other date, unless and until after they have first pursued, fulfilled exhausted and otherwise ensured strict compliance with and faithful adherence to all the mandatory procedures/conditions precedent by all diverse legislations currently in force regulating the calling and or settlement of Industrial and or labour disputes in Nigeria, or as may be otherwise directed by a specific order of court.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in; margin-left:.5in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:justify;text-indent:-.5in; line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">(5) Such further or other order(s) as to the court may deem fit in the circumstances.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">The Complaint was duly served upon the Defendants. In reaction to the complaint and the accompanying processes, the 1<sup>st</sup> defendant filed a statement of defence dated 16<sup>th</sup> September, 2010 and filed on the 17<sup>th</sup> September, 2010. The 2<sup>nd</sup> and 3<sup>rd</sup> defendants filed jointly an amended statement of defence dated 17<sup>th</sup> February, 2015 and filed on the 18<sup>th</sup> “February, 2015. However, the 1<sup>st</sup> defendant never showed up to defend the suit but the 2<sup>nd</sup> and 3<sup>rd</sup> Defendants diddefendit and also counter-claimed against the Claimant. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">At the trial, the Claimant presented one witness, CW1, who testified and was cross examined by both counsel for the defendants. Thereafter, the 2<sup>nd</sup> and 3<sup>rd</sup> Defendants called their witness, DW1 who adopted his written Statement on oath and was cross examined by the learned Claimant’s counsel.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">In terms of documentary evidence, the following were tendered by the Claimant and admitted by the Court:<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:1.0in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in;mso-list:l8 level1 lfo16"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-size: 14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"">(i)<span style="font-variant-numeric: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">A letter dated 5<sup>th</sup> July, 2010 addressed to the Claimant forwarding the Communique issued at the Congress of the Judiciary Staff Union of Nigeria, Enugu State Branch admitted as <b>Exhibit A.</b><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:1.0in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:1.0in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">(ii) A document dated 5<sup>th</sup> July, 2010 titled“Communiqué issued at the end of an emergency congress meeting of the Enugu State Branch of the Judiciary Staff Union of Nigeria (JUSUN) held at Enugu on the 5<sup>th</sup> day of July, 2010”, admitted as <b>Exhibit A1.</b><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:1.0in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">(iii) A forwarding letter dated 22<sup>nd</sup> July, 2010 addressed to the Claimant and a letter titled “Communiqué reached at the end of the meeting between the National Executive Committee of JUSUN and the South East Zonal Caucus of JUSUN at Enugu this Saturday, the 17<sup>th</sup> day of July, 2010”, admitted as Exhibits<b>B and B1</b>.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:1.0in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">(vi) An undated letter tilted “RE: Need for your urgent Intervention” admitted as <b>Exhibit C.</b><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:14.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">The 2<sup>nd</sup> and 3<sup>rd</sup> Defendants through DWI tendered the following documents which were admitted in evidence:<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:1.0in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">(i) Report of the final committee on Harmonization of salaries of staff of the Judiciary in Nigeria dated 11<sup>th</sup> March, 2009 and admitted as <b>Exhibit D1.</b><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:14.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:1.0in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">(ii) Report of the final committee on Harmonization of the three earlier reports on the demands of the Judiciary Staff Union of Nigeria (JUSUN) DATED 19<sup>th</sup> February, 2009 admitted as <b>Exhibit D2.</b><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:1.0in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">(iii) Forwarding of Report of the Special Committee on Harmonization of the demands of the Judiciary Staff Union of Nigeria (JUSUN) DATED 20<sup>TH</sup> DAY of February, 2009 admitted as <b>Exhibit D3.</b><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">The Learned Counsel for the 2<sup>nd</sup> and 3<sup>rd</sup> defendants raised the issue of the incompetence of the Pleading of the Claimant. He stated that the Supreme Court in the case of <b><i>General Sani Abatcha & 3 Ors vs Chief Gani Fawehinmi (2000) 6 NWLR (Pt. 660) p. 228 at 276 </i></b>held that<b><i>whilst it is a principal rule of pleading that a party must plead material facts only and not law, every party is permitted by his pleading to raise a point of law. It is thus not only unnecessary but contrary to the rule of pleading to plead law, statute or sections thereof before reliance can be placed on them. If a party’s case depends on a statute, all he needs do is fully to plead material facts necessary to bring his case within that statute.</i></b> See <u>Anyawu v Mbara (1992) 5 NWLR (Pt. 242) 386 referred to at p. 306 paras A-B</u>.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">That in the instant case a great deal of the averment in paragraphs 14, 15 and 16 of the amended statement of facts establishing cause of action consist of legal conclusions and not facts and to that extent the averments are in violation of the rules of pleadings. That Claims 1, 3, 4 and B(i) are all in violation of the rules of pleading. These paragraphs, counsel submitted, ought to be struck out and so he urged the court to strike out the said paragraphs 14, 15 and 16 of the amended statement of facts establishing cause of action and claims 1, 3, 4 and B(i).<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">Furthermore, according to counsel, the 2<sup>nd</sup> and 3<sup>rd</sup>Defendants/Counter Claimants, for themselves and on behalf of the Judiciary Workers Union Enugu State Branch Counter claimed as follows:<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-add-space:auto;text-align:justify;text-indent:-.25in;line-height:normal; mso-list:l12 level1 lfo5"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-size:14.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"">(a)<span style="font-variant-numeric: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">A Declaration of Court that there is no Trade Dispute between the Government of Enugu State and the Judiciary Workers of Enugu State.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-add-space:auto;text-align:justify;text-indent:-.25in;line-height:normal; mso-list:l12 level1 lfo5"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-size:14.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"">(b)<span style="font-variant-numeric: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">A declaration that the issue between the Government of Enugu State and the Judiciary workers of the State is the implementation of Consolidated Judiciary Salary Structure (CONJUSS) as Recommended by the Body of Chief Judges.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height: 107%;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom: .0001pt;mso-add-space:auto;text-align:justify;text-indent:-.25in;line-height: normal;mso-list:l12 level1 lfo5"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-size: 14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"">(c)<span style="font-variant-numeric: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">An order of Court that the Claimant complies and implements the Consolidated Judiciary Salary Structure (CONJUSS) as Recommended by the Body of Chief Judges with effect from February 2009.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height: 107%;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom: .0001pt;mso-add-space:auto;text-align:justify;text-indent:-.25in;line-height: normal;mso-list:l12 level1 lfo5"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-size: 14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"">(d)<span style="font-variant-numeric: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">The immediate payment of arrears on the basis of the Consolidated Judiciary Salary Structure (CONJUSS) to all the Judiciary Workers of Enugu State with effect from the month of February 2009.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpLast" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-add-space:auto"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:107%;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">The issues for determination according to the 2<sup>nd</sup> and 3<sup>rd</sup> Defendants are as follows:<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom: 0in;margin-left:.75in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;mso-add-space:auto;text-align:justify; text-indent:-.25in;line-height:normal;mso-list:l17 level1 lfo6"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"">1.<span style="font-variant-numeric: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">Whether the 2<sup>nd</sup> and 3<sup>rd</sup> Defendants are engaged in the provision of Essential Services?<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in; margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:.75in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;mso-add-space:auto; text-align:justify;text-indent:-.25in;line-height:normal;mso-list:l17 level1 lfo6"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"">2.<span style="font-variant-numeric: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">Whether there is a Trade Dispute between the Claimant and the 2<sup>nd</sup> and 3<sup>rd</sup> Defendants?<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height: 107%;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in; margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:.75in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;mso-add-space:auto; text-align:justify;text-indent:-.25in;line-height:normal;mso-list:l17 level1 lfo6"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"">3.<span style="font-variant-numeric: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">Whether this Court can grant prayers (a), (b) and (d) of the Claimant’s Claim?<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height: 107%;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpLast" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in; margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:.75in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;mso-add-space:auto; text-align:justify;text-indent:-.25in;line-height:normal;mso-list:l17 level1 lfo6"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"">4.<span style="font-variant-numeric: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">Whether the 2<sup>nd</sup> and 3<sup>rd</sup> Defendants (as representing the entire workers of the JUSUN in Enugu State are entitled to their Counter claim?<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">Arguing issue one, learned counsel stated that in relation to paragraphs 14 and 15, the entirety of the Preamble to Exhibit D2 settles the incompetent pleading as what was at stake is not a trade dispute rather implementation of a Resolution of a Trade Dispute. Paragraph 15 also is a misconception of what constitutes Essential Services and those involved in it. That Section 48(1) of the Trade Disputes Act Cap T8 LFN 2004 defined what is Essential Service; that also section 31(9)(b) of the Trade Unions Act Cap T14 provide as follows:<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in; margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:.75in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;mso-add-space:auto; text-align:justify;text-indent:-.25in;line-height:normal;mso-list:l11 level1 lfo7"><!--[if !supportLists]--><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"">(1)<span style="font-style: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span></i><!--[endif]--><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"">The public service of the Federation or of a State which shall for the purpose of this Act include service in a civil capacity, of persons employed in the Armed Forces of the Federation or any part thereof, and also, of persons employed in an industry or undertaking (corporate or incorporate) which deals or is connected with the manufacture or production of materials for use in the Armed forces of the Federation or any part thereof;<o:p></o:p></span></i></p> <p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in; margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:.75in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;mso-add-space:auto; text-align:justify;text-indent:-.25in;line-height:normal;mso-list:l11 level1 lfo7"><!--[if !supportLists]--><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"">(2)<span style="font-style: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span></i><!--[endif]--><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"">(a) for, or in connection with, the supply of electricity, power or water, or fuel of any kind,<o:p></o:p></span></i></p> <p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in; margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:.75in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;mso-add-space:auto; text-align:justify;line-height:normal"><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">(b) for, or in connection with, sound, broadcasting, or postal, telegraph, cable, wireless or telephonic communications,<o:p></o:p></span></i></p> <p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in; margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:.75in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;mso-add-space:auto; text-align:justify;line-height:normal"><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">(c) for maintaining ports, harbours, docks or aerodrome, or for, or in connection with, transportation of persons, goods or livestock by road, rail, sea, river or air,<o:p></o:p></span></i></p> <p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in; margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:.75in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;mso-add-space:auto; text-align:justify;line-height:normal"><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">(d) for, or in connection with, the burial of the dead, hospitals, the treatment of the sick, the prevention of disease, or any of the following public health matters namely sanitation, road-cleansing and the disposal of night-soil and rubbish,<o:p></o:p></span></i></p> <p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpLast" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in; margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:.75in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;mso-add-space:auto; text-align:justify;line-height:normal"><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">(e) for dealing with outbreaks of fire;<o:p></o:p></span></i></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> (3) services in any capacity in any of the following organizations<o:p></o:p></span></i></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> (a) the Central Bank of Nigeria<o:p></o:p></span></i></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> (b) the Nigerian Security Printing and Minting Company Limited<o:p></o:p></span></i></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in; margin-left:1.0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:justify;line-height:normal"><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"">(c) anybody corporate licensed to carry on banking business under the Banks and other Financial Institutions Act.<o:p></o:p></span></i></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in; margin-left:.5in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:justify;line-height:normal"><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"">(See Section 7(1)(a) to (c) of the Trade Disputes (Essential Services) Act Cap T9 Laws of the Federation 2004.)<o:p></o:p></span></i></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">Continuing, learned counsel submitted that with this definition, the 2<sup>nd</sup> and 3<sup>rd</sup> Defendants are not involved in the provision of Essential Service whose right to strike and the likes are curtailed. That in fact, several diverse laws recognize the rights of the 2<sup>nd</sup> and 3<sup>rd</sup> defendants to embark on strike. He referred to Section 31(6)(a) of the Trade Unions (Amendment) Act 2005 which provides as follows:<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in; margin-left:.5in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:justify;line-height:normal"><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"">No person, trade union or employer shall take part in a strike or lockout unless-<o:p></o:p></span></i></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in; margin-left:.5in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:justify;line-height:normal"><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif""> </span></i></p> <p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in; margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:1.25in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;mso-add-space:auto; text-align:justify;text-indent:-.25in;line-height:normal;mso-list:l5 level1 lfo8"><!--[if !supportLists]--><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"">(a)<span style="font-style: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span></i><!--[endif]--><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"">The person, trade union or employer is not engaged in the provision of essential services;<o:p></o:p></span></i></p> <p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in; margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:1.25in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;mso-add-space:auto; text-align:justify;text-indent:-.25in;line-height:normal;mso-list:l5 level1 lfo8"><!--[if !supportLists]--><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"">(b)<span style="font-style: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span></i><!--[endif]--><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"">The strike or lockout concerns a labour dispute that constitutes a dispute of right;<o:p></o:p></span></i></p> <p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in; margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:1.25in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;mso-add-space:auto; text-align:justify;text-indent:-.25in;line-height:normal;mso-list:l5 level1 lfo8"><!--[if !supportLists]--><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"">(c)<span style="font-style: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span></i><!--[endif]--><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"">The strike or lockout concerns a dispute arising from a collective and fundamental breach of a contract of employment or collective agreement on the part of the employee, trade union or employer;<o:p></o:p></span></i></p> <p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpLast" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in; margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:1.25in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;mso-add-space:auto; text-align:justify;text-indent:-.25in;line-height:normal;mso-list:l5 level1 lfo8"><!--[if !supportLists]--><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"">(d)<span style="font-style: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span></i><!--[endif]--><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif""> The provisions for arbitration in the Trade Disputes Act Cap T8, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 2004 have first been (complied) with; and<o:p></o:p></span></i></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in; margin-left:1.0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:justify;line-height:normal"><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"">In the case of an employee or a trade union, a ballot has been conducted in accordance with the rules and constitution of the Trade Union at which a simple majority of all registered members voted to go on strike.<o:p></o:p></span></i></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">Furthermore, Section 43(1) of the Trade Unions Act Cap T14 LFN, 2004 recognizes peaceful picketing as follows:<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> <i><o:p></o:p></i></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in; margin-left:.5in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:justify;line-height:normal"><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"">It shall be lawful for one or more persons, acting on their own behalf or on behalf of a trade union or registered Federation of Trade Unions or an individual employer or firm in contemplation or furtherance of a trade dispute, to attend at or near a house or place where a person resides or works or carries on business or happens to be, if they so attend merely for the purpose of peacefully obtaining or communicating information or of peacefully persuading any person to work or abstain from working.</span></i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">On the second issue learned counsel stated that Section 47 of the Trade Disputes Act, Cap 432 Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 1990 defines a trade dispute as meaning any dispute between employers and workers or between workers and workers which is connected with the employment or non-employment or the terms of employment and physical conditions of work of any person. He referred to the case of <b>Dr Taiwo Oloruntoba-Oju & 5 Ors vs Prof. P. A. Dopamu & 6 Ors (2008) All FWLR (Pt. 411) p. 810 at @812-813.</b> To the learned counsel this is not the case between the Claimant and the 2<sup>nd</sup> and 3<sup>rd</sup> Defendants as the issue between them is implementation of a resolution of a trade dispute as contained in Exhibit D2.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">That the Claimant at paragraph 10 of the Amended Statement of Facts insinuated that the agreement between the Government and the Defendants is not a Collective agreement. This cannot be true as collective agreement means…<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in; margin-left:.5in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:justify;line-height:normal"><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"">…any agreement in writing for the settlement of a Trade Dispute and relating to terms of employment and physical conditions of work concluded between (a) an employer, a group of employers or one or more organizations representative of employers on the one hand; and (b) one or more trade unions or organizations representing workers, or the duly appointed representative of any body of workers on the other hand..</span></i><span style="font-size:14.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">See Section 48 of the Trade Disputes Act, Cap T8, LFN, 2004.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">That in Exhibit D2, it is stated at Second page, discounting cover page; at bullet 8 line 3 that <u>State Judicial Service Commission</u> and the <u>last two words ie State were members of the Committee that produced the exhibit.</u> Paragraph 4 of the exhibit at that same page two stated all the efforts made at resolving the demands of the Defendants in this suit. That this lays to rest the belief of the Claimant that Exhibit D2 is not a Collective Agreement as variously stated at paragraph 10, and therefore regarding any action by the Defendants to ensure the implementation of this as illegal as stated at paragraphs 11, 12 and 13 of the Amended Statement of Facts. Counsel stated that <u>State Judicial Service Commission of the State</u> is made up of (a) the Chief Judge of the State who shall be the Chairman (b) The Attorney General of the State etc. He referred to Part II, Third Schedule paragraph 5(a) to (f) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended). That it was this Commission that represented Enugu State at the meetings, may be the Claimant, i.e., The AG Enugu State would have wanted to appear in all the meetings instead of the Chief Judge of the State, counsel stated.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">On issue 3, whether this Court can grant prayers (a), (b) and (d) of the Claimant’s Claim, learned counsel stated that the claimant at paragraph (a) claimed as follows:<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom: 0in;margin-left:.75in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;mso-add-space:auto;text-align:justify; text-indent:-.25in;line-height:normal;mso-list:l3 level1 lfo12"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"">(a)<span style="font-variant-numeric: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">A declaration that the 1<sup>st</sup> Respondent as a Trade Union within the meaning of <b>Section 1(1) of the Trade Unions Act Cap T14, LFN 2004, as amended by the Trade Unions (Amendment) Act No. 17 of 2005,</b> and the 2<sup>nd</sup> and 3<sup>rd</sup> Respondents as Chairman and Secretary of the Enugu State Branch of the 1<sup>st</sup> Respondent (JUSUN Enugu Branch) respectively and all other functionaries of JUSUN Enugu Branch or persons presently acting or who may subsequently act, as such at any time material to this Complaint jointly and severally cannot lawfully give instruction or issue any directives or pass or implement any resolution, or effect any measures or otherwise take any steps of any kind to cause, or instigate, or to compel, encourage or persuade in any other manner, all or any members of JUSUN Enugu Branch, or any other staff of the State Judiciary to embark on any strike/industrial action unless and until after they have first pursued fulfilled, exhausted and otherwise ensured strict compliance with and faithful adherence to all the mandatory procedures/conditions precedent prescribed by all diverse legislation currently in force regulating the calling and settlement of industrial and or labour dispute in Nigeria or as may be otherwise directed by a specific order of Court.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:14.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">At paragraph (b) they claimed 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 lfo12"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-size: 14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"">(b)<span style="font-variant-numeric: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">declaration that all communiqués hitherto or which may purport to be subsequently issued, by the Respondents or by anybody acting for or on behalf of them, or acting in furtherance of interests, which has the effect of giving, or issuing directives or passing or implementing resolutions, or effecting any measures or otherwise taking any steps of any kind to cause, or instigate, or to compel encourage, or persuade in any other manner, all or any members of JUNSUN Enugu Branch, or any other staff of the State Judiciary, to embark on strike/Industrial Action from Monday, 16<sup>th</sup> August, 1010 or as from any other date, without, first pursuing, fulfilling, exhausting and otherwise ensuring strict compliance with and faithful adherence to all the mandatory procedures/conditions prescribed by all diverse legislations currently in force regulating the calling and settlement of industrial or labour disputes in Nigeria, or obtaining a specific and prior order of Court to that effect are unlawful.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:14.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">At paragraph (d) they claimed as follows:<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.75in;text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">(d)An order of perpetual injunction restraining the 2<sup>nd</sup> and 3<sup>rd</sup> respondents and all those they represent in this action, jointly and severally, from taking part in any strike or engaging in any conduct in contemplation or furtherance of any strike/industrial action with the consequential effect of withholding or withdrawing themselves from the performance of their usual daily job and duties as workers in the Judiciary of Enugu State, or in any other institution within the public service of Enugu State, while employed thereat, in violation of the provisions of <b>Section 31(6)(a) of the Trade Unions Act, Cap. T14, LFN. 2004 as amended by the Trade Union (Amendment) Act No. 17 of 2005</b>.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">Learned counsel then submitted that neither by the provisions of section 1(1) of the Trade Unions Act Cap T14 LFN 2004 as amended by the Trade Unions (Amendment) Act No. 17 of 2005 is it contemplated that a Court can make the above declarations. Rather by the provisions of section 43(1) of the Trade Unions Act, trade unions right to peaceful picketing is guaranteed as follows:<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in; margin-left:.5in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:justify;line-height:normal"><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"">It shall be lawful for one or more persons, acting on their own behalf or on behalf of a trade union or registered Federation of Trade Unions or an individual employer or firm in contemplation or furtherance of a trade dispute, to attend at or near a house or place where a person resides or works or carries on business or happens to be, if they so attend merely for the purpose of peacefully obtaining or communicating information or of peacefully persuading any person to work or abstain from working.</span></i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">And that subsection (1A) of the subsection went ahead to provide that <i>no person shall subject any other person to any kind of restraint or restriction of his personal freedom in the course of persuasion.</i> To counsel this recognizes the right of Trade Unions to freely meet and embark on strike. There is no other law that imposes any restraint on this. Therefore the court cannot impose it by granting prayers (a), (b) and (d) of the Claim.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">On issue four, which is whether the 2<sup>nd</sup> and 3<sup>rd</sup> Defendants (as representing the entire workers of the JUSUN in Enugu State) are entitled to their Counter Claim, learned counsel re-stated the Counter claims as follows:<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-add-space:auto;text-align:justify;text-indent:-.25in;line-height:normal; mso-list:l1 level1 lfo9"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-size:14.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"">(a)<span style="font-variant-numeric: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">A Declaration of Court that there is no Trade Dispute between the Government of Enugu State and the Judiciary Workers of Enugu State.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-add-space:auto;text-align:justify;text-indent:-.25in;line-height:normal; mso-list:l1 level1 lfo9"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-size:14.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"">(b)<span style="font-variant-numeric: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">A declaration that the issue between the Government of Enugu State and the Judiciary workers of the State is the implementation of Consolidated Judiciary Salary Structure (CONJUSS) as Recommended by the Body of Chief Judges.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height: 107%;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom: .0001pt;mso-add-space:auto;text-align:justify;text-indent:-.25in;line-height: normal;mso-list:l1 level1 lfo9"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-size: 14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"">(c)<span style="font-variant-numeric: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">An order of Court that the Claimant complies and implements the Consolidated Judiciary Salary Structure (CONJUSS) as Recommended by the Body of Chief Judges with effect from February 2009.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height: 107%;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpLast" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-add-space:auto;text-align:justify;text-indent:-.25in;line-height:normal; mso-list:l1 level1 lfo9"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-size:14.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"">(d)<span style="font-variant-numeric: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">The immediate payment of arrears on the basis of the Consolidated Judiciary Salary Structure (CONJUSS) to all the Judiciary Workers of Enugu State with effect from the month of February 2009.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">He then stated that the Claimant never filed any defence to the Counter Claim. He then referred to the decision in the case of <b>Ali Pindar Kwajaffa & 2 Ors vs Bank of the North Limited (1999) 2 NWLR (Pt. 587) p. 522 at 534 </b>as follows:<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in; margin-left:.5in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:justify;line-height:normal"><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"">It is necessary for a Plaintiff to file a defence to a counter claim. If he fails to do so, or files one without traversing the material averment in the counter claim, there will be no issues joined between him and the defendant on the subject matter of the counter claim and the allegation contained in the counter claim is deemed admitted.</span></i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">He also cited from the decision further as follows:<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in; margin-left:.5in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:justify;line-height:normal"><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"">Failure of a plaintiff to file a defence to counter claim may not be disastrous if he succeeds in his claim. His success may render useless the counter claim depending on the nature of the counter claim. However, where he falls in his claim and had filed no defence to the counter claim, the defendant’s claim in his counter claim remains uncontroverted.<o:p></o:p></span></i></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">Counsel also referred to <b>Nigerian Housing Development Society Ltd vs Mummuni (1977) 2 SC 57 at 85-86.<o:p></o:p></b></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">He continued that if issues 1 and 2 as raised by him are resolved against the Claimant, it means that his non filing of a defence to the counter claim and the concomitant admission of same succeeds and it was a sheer waste of time of court for the 2<sup>nd</sup> and 3<sup>rd</sup> defendants to have opened defence to these claims admitted by the Claimant/Defendant to Counter claim. In <b>Nigerian Housing Development Society Ltd vs Mummuni (1977) 2 SC 37</b> it was held:<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in; margin-left:.5in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:justify;line-height:normal"><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"">So where a defendant counter claims against the plaintiff, the latter is duty bound to file a reply in defence to the counter claim otherwise the court is entitled, in fact obliged, to assume that the plaintiff has no defence to the counter claim and may enter judgment for the defendant accordingly.<o:p></o:p></span></i></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">That the court went further to give its reason for so holding thus:<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in; margin-left:.5in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:justify;line-height:normal"><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"">This is because where a defendant pleads certain facts in his pleading in support of his counter claim, with all the necessary particulars, but the plaintiff fails to reply to them, no issue is raised on such defendant’s pleading. So the court can proceed to give judgment on it without much ado.<o:p></o:p></span></i></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">To learned counsel, the defendants’ in paragraph 3 of their statement of defence stated that Exhibit D2 is a Collective Agreement; at paragraph 4 it stated that the Claimant refused to implement this Collective Agreement, and at paragraph 8 asked for what is due to them from their employers. On the basis of these paragraphs not denied the 2<sup>nd</sup> and 3<sup>rd</sup> Defendants counter claimed.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">Learned counsel then prayed the Court to dismiss the Claimant’s action and enter judgment to the 2<sup>nd</sup> and 3<sup>rd</sup> defendant’s counter claim as same are admitted by the Claimant as facts admitted need no further proof, relying on <b>Owoo vs Edet (2012) All FWLR (Pt. 642) p. 1791 at 1793.<o:p></o:p></b></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">On his own part, the learned counsel for the Claimant filed and adopted his final written address in which he formulated the following issues for the Court’s determination:<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -32.25pt;mso-list:l20 level1 lfo13"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"">(a)<span style="font-variant-numeric: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">Whether the 2<sup>nd</sup> and 3<sup>rd</sup> defendants have filed any defence to this suit?<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -32.25pt;mso-list:l20 level1 lfo13"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"">(b)<span style="font-variant-numeric: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">Whether there is any competent counter claim in this suit?<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:14.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -32.25pt;mso-list:l20 level1 lfo13"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"">(c)<span style="font-variant-numeric: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">Whether the 2<sup>nd</sup> and 3<sup>rd</sup> defendants are engaged in the provision of essential services within the meaning of section S.31 (6) (a) of the Trade Unions Act, Cap. T14, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 2004, and as such, precluded from embarking on any strike at all?<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-add-space:auto"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:107%;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -32.25pt;mso-list:l20 level1 lfo13"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"">(d)<span style="font-variant-numeric: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">In any event, whether the Defendants and all those they represent in this action, jointly and severally, by whatever name called may lawfully direct or instruct their members to embark on, or themselves, as the case may be, embark on strike/Industrial action in respect of an alleged trade dispute with the claimant where the alleged dispute does not arise from the claimant’s collective and fundamental breach of either contracts of employment or collective agreement between it and the defendants?<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-add-space:auto"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:107%;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -32.25pt;mso-list:l20 level1 lfo13"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"">(e)<span style="font-variant-numeric: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">Whether the strike embarked upon by the defendants on 16<sup>th</sup> day of August, 2010 was unlawful either as being a contravention of either S.31(6)(a) of the Trade Unions Act, Cap. T14, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 2004, or S. 18 of the Trade Disputes Act, Cap. T8, Law of the Federation of Nigeria 2004?<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-add-space:auto"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:107%;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -32.25pt;mso-list:l20 level1 lfo13"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"">(f)<span style="font-variant-numeric: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">Whether the claimant is entitled to the reliefs prayed for? <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in; margin-left:3.75pt;margin-bottom:.0001pt"><span style="font-size:14.0pt; line-height:107%;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -32.25pt;mso-list:l20 level1 lfo13"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"">(g)<span style="font-variant-numeric: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">Whether there is any counter claim before this court? <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-add-space:auto"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:107%;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:14.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">Arguing issues (a) and (b) together, learned counsel for the Claimant stated that it is trite that once a Complaint is filed by the complainant against the defendants, the defendants, if they have any defence, should file a statement of defence after which they will continue with a counter claim clearly headed counter-claim if they have same while the claimant files a reply to counter claim if he has any. That in the instant case, the defendants who have no defence in respect of this suit of course did not file any statement of defence to this action rather they filed what they called the counter-claim in response to the claim of the claimant. Counsel referred to paragraphs 1 and 9 of the amended statement of defence of the defendants dated 17<sup>th</sup> February, 2015 and filed on the 18<sup>th</sup> February, 2015. Even though that the said counter-claim was headed “Amended Statement of Defence of the 2<sup>nd</sup> and 3<sup>rd</sup> Defendants.” The said paragraph 1 stated clearly:<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">(i) The claimant is not entitled to any of the claims as stated at paragraphs 1 to 4 of the amended complaint RATHER the 2<sup>nd</sup> and 3<sup>rd</sup> defendants for themselves and on behalf of all the Judiciary workers of Enugu State <b>Counter Claim</b> as follows:<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:1.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">(a) A declaration of court that there is no Trade Dispute between the Government of Enugu State and the Judiciary Workers of Enugu State.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:1.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">(b) A declaration that the issue between the government of Enugu State and the Judiciary workers of the state is the implementation of consolidated Judiciary Salary Structure (CONJUSS).<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:1.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">(c) An order of Court that the claimant complies and implements the consolidated Judiciary Salary Structure (CONJUSS) with effect from February, 2009.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:14.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">The defendants also concluding in paragraph 9 of their headed amended statement of defence stated that:<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:1.0in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">(9) The complainant is not in any way entitled to the claims as stated in paragraph 1a rather the Court should make order by way of <b>COUNTER CLAIM BY THE 2<sup>ND</sup> AND 3<sup>RD</sup> DEFENDNATS FOR THEMSELVES AND ON BEHALF OF ALL THE MEMBERS OF THE 1<sup>ST</sup> DEFENDANT, ENUGU STATE BRANCH, for<o:p></o:p></b></span></i></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></i></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:1.5in;text-align:justify"><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"">(a)A Declaration of Court that there is no Trade Dispute between the Government of Enugu State and the Judiciary Workers of Enugu State.<o:p></o:p></span></i></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></i></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:1.75in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.25in;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo14"><!--[if !supportLists]--><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"">(b)<span style="font-style: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span></i><!--[endif]--><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"">Declaration that the issue between the Government of Enugu State and the Judiciary worker of the State is the implementation of consolidated Judiciary Salary Structure (CONJUS)<o:p></o:p></span></i></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:1.75in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.25in;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo14"><!--[if !supportLists]--><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"">(c)<span style="font-style: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span></i><!--[endif]--><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"">An order of Court that he claimant complies and the consolidated Judiciary Salary Structure (CONJUSS) with effect from February, 2009.<o:p></o:p></span></i></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></i></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:1.75in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.25in"><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">(d) The immediate payment of arrears on the basis of the CONJUSS to all the Judiciary Worker of Enugu State with effect from the month of February, 2009.<o:p></o:p></span></i></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></i></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:14.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">That a close look at paragraph (a) of the Counter-Claim headed amended statement of defence reveals that the 2<sup>nd</sup> and 3<sup>rd</sup> defendants are also praying the Honorable Court to make the order binding on the 1<sup>st</sup> defendant who had at all times been represented by P. Nnamani Esq. The 1<sup>st</sup> Defendant is Judiciary Staff Union of Nigeria and seeing themselves as nominal Party Stopped appearing in this suit. Learned counsel submitted that counter claim cannot take the position of statement of defence. It is a fresh and independent action and the facts raised in the claimant’s claim which is a different suit. It must be traversed in the statement of defence. That efforts made by the defendants in the instant case to traverse the facts in the count-claim did not make a statement of defence as they filed none in the instant case. From the foregoing therefore, it is clear that what the defendants filed is what they called Counter-claim though headed amended statement of defence. A counter-claim is a cross action and not merely a defence to the plaintiff’s claim. It is an independent action and not part of the original action though for convenience the two are tied together. The defendant in a counter-claim assumes the position of a plaintiff and the plaintiff in the original action assumes the position of a defendant. Simply put, the parties in the original action swap place in the counter-claim. Counsel referred to the cases <b>of Gowon V SWLR (pt.815) 38 and Musa V. Yusuf (2006) 6NWLR (pt.977) 454.<o:p></o:p></b></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:14.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:14.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">Furthermore, that the defendants in the instant action cannot use counter-claim as statement of defence. That counter-claim is not a shield as it is a sword on its own. A counter-claim is an independent action which enables a defendant to enforce a claim against a plaintiff. It is by nature a “sword” and not a “shield”. Thus, the rules of pleadings apply with the same force and potency to a counter-claim and a defence to counter-claim as if they are respectively a statement of claim and a statement of defence, relying on <b>Okonkwo V. C.C. B. (NIG) PLC (1997) 6 NWLR (pt. 507) 48.<o:p></o:p></b></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:14.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">Learned counsel further submitted that the defendants neither filed a statement of defence nor filed a counter-claim. The amended statement of defence filed by the defendants does not even bear the heading “counter-claim” and there are no paragraphs pleaded in support of the said counter-claim having regards that rules of pleading applies also to counter-claim. He referred to <b>Musa V. Yusuf (2006) 6 NWLR (pt. 977) 454.<o:p></o:p></b></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:14.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">He further claimed that a counter-claim is governed by the same rules of pleading.<br> All the facts relied on by way of counter-claim must be stated in numbered paragraphs(following on in the same serial from those of the defence, not starting a fresh sense) under the heading “counter-claim” so as to distinguish them from facts alleged by way of defence. A counter-claim may comprise several distinct causes of action, but the facts on which each cause of action is founded must be stated, as far as may be, separately and distinctly, and the relief claimed be stated specifically, either simply or in the alternative. Counsel referred to <b>Odgers on pleadings and practice 20<sup>th</sup> Edition at 221.</b><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:14.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">To counsel, in the instant case, the so called counter-claim was not headed counter-claim neither were there facts relied on, put on numbered paragraphs.It is therefore obvious that the defendants do not have counter-claim.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:14.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">However, learned counsel continued, assuming without conceding that the defendants filed a statement of defence in this matter, they did not defend the averments in their pleading. That it is the law that pleading is not synonymous with evidence and so cannot be construed as such in the determination of the merit or otherwise of the case. Thus a party who seeks judgment in his favour is required by law to produce adequate credible evidence in support of his pleading and where there is none, the averments in the pleading are deemed abandoned. The same principle of law goes for whatever defence seeks to rely on in the process of demolishing the case against him. Counsel lay support in the case of <b>Arabambi V. Advance Beverage Ind. Limited (2005) 19 NWLR (P. 959).</b><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:14.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">That moreso, evidence which is at variance with the averments in pleading goes to no issue and should be disregarded or discountenanced by the court. It does not matter that such evidence which is inconsistent with the pleadings had been received by court. He referred to the case of <b>Buhari V. Obasanjo (2006) 2 NWLR (pt.910) 241.<o:p></o:p></b></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:14.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">In the instant case, the sole witness of the defendants testified and adopted his statement on oath dated and filed on 2<sup>nd</sup> April, 2012 as his evidence in this case. Thus the witness on oath stated clearly in paragraph 1 (b) and (c) of his statement on Oath that the claimant is not entitled to any of the claims as stated in paragraphs 19 rather the court should make order by way of Counter-claim by the 2<sup>nd</sup> and 3<sup>rd</sup>defendants for themselves and on behalf of all the members of the 1<sup>st</sup> defendant, Enugu State Branch for:<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:1.0in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">(b) A declaration that the issue between the Government of Enugu State and the Judiciary workers of the state is the implementation of consolidated judiciary salary structure (CONJUSS) as recommended by the Body of Chief Judges.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:1.0in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">(c) An order of court that the claimant complies and implements the consolidated judiciary salary structure (CONJUSS) as recommended by the Body of Chief Judges with effect from February 2009.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:14.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">Counsel referred to paragraph 12 (b) and (c) of the written statement on Oath of Comrade C.O. Okonkwo, the only witness called by the defendants dated and filed on 2<sup>nd</sup> day of April, 2012. He specifically stated that they are asking for “CONJUSS as recommended by the Chief Judge”.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:14.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">To the learned counsel this evidence varies with the claim of the 2<sup>nd</sup> and 3<sup>rd</sup> defendants who in their pleading claim for “CONJUSS” and not “CONJUSS as recommended by Chief Judges” as stated by the witness on oath. No evidence whatsoever was led to establish the amended statement of defence dated 12<sup>th</sup> day of February 2015 and filed on the 18<sup>th</sup> day of February, 2015. Counsel referred the Court to the amended statement of the 2<sup>nd</sup> and 3<sup>rd</sup> defendants’ paragraph 9(b) and (c). It is the law that where no evidence is led to establish the claims made before a court, such claims will be dismissed for want of evidence. He placed reliance on the case of <b>RIMI V. INEC (2006) 6 NWLR (Pt. 920)56.</b><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:14.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">It is learned counsel’s further submission that an averment of a fact in pleadings is no evidence and can never be so construed. It has to be proved by evidence subject however, to admission by the order party<b>. N.A.S. Limited V. UBA. PLC (2005) ALL FWLR 418</b>. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:14.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">The claim of the 2<sup>nd</sup> and 3<sup>rd</sup> defendants on the amended statement of defence was not admitted by the claimant. It is in fact deemed to be abandoned and ought to be struck out, relying on the authority of <b>Buhari V. Obasanjo (2006) 2 NWLR (Pt.910) 241.<o:p></o:p></b></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><b><span style="font-size:14.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> <o:p></o:p></span></b></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:14.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">He urged the court to resolve issues “a” and “b” in favour of the claimant.<b><o:p></o:p></b></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:14.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">Issue c is: whether the 2<sup>nd</sup> and 3<sup>rd</sup> Defendants are engaged in the provision of essential services within the meaning of S.31 (6) (a) of the Trade Unions Act, Cap. T14, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 2004, and as such precluded from embarking on any strike?<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify"><b><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif""> </span></b></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:14.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">It is averred in paragraph 4 of the Claimant’s Amended statement that the 2<sup>nd</sup> Defendant and all those he represents in this action are employees of Enugu State of Nigeria (the “State”). Paragraph 2 of the Defendants Amended Defence expressly admits this averment. It therefore follows that the fact of the 2<sup>nd</sup> and 3<sup>rd</sup> Defendants being the employees of the State is not in issue, being a fact admitted which needs no further proof. He referred to S. 123 of the Evidence Act 2011.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:14.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">He submitted that the 2<sup>nd</sup> and 3<sup>rd</sup> Defendants and all those they represent in this action are engaged in the provision of essential services within the meaning of S. 31(6) (a) of the Trade Unions Act Cap. T14 Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 2004 as amended by the Trade Unions (Amendment) Act. No. 17 of 2005 (“Trade Unions Act”) and are as such precluded by law from embarking on any strike while so engaged.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:14.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">That Section 31(9) (b) of the Trade Unions Act provides that “essential services” for the purpose of the Trade Unions Act shall be as defined in the First Schedule of Trade Disputes Act Cap. T8 L.F.N. 2004. The First Schedule of the Trade Disputers Act (The “First schedule”) defines “essential services” under three (3) distinct paragraphs each representing a separate group of services; It is counsel’s submission that the 2<sup>nd</sup> and 3<sup>rd</sup> Defendants and those they represent are all engaged in classes of services defined by paragraph 1 of the First schedule as “essential services.”<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:14.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">Furthermore, that paragraph 1 of the First Schedule defines “essential services” to include “the public service of the Federation or of a State”. However, there is no guidance in the Trade Disputes Act as to what constitutes the public service of a State, neither does Interpretation Act Cap. 123. L.F.N. 2004 (Interpretation Act define “public service.” But S. 18 of the (Interpretation Act) defines the expression “Public Officer” to mean a member of the public service of the Federation or of a State “within the meaning of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999”(the “constitution). It is therefore obvious that the Interpretation Act, and by necessary implication the Trade Disputes Act, adopts the meaning accorded the phrase “public service” by the Constitution for its purpose. Even if this were not so, the definition given to the phrase would nevertheless have been applicable to the Trade Unions Act and the Trade Disputes Act, since the provision of the Constitution override any inconsistent provision in any act of the National Assembly. So in whatever way one looks at it, what constitutes the public service of a State is as defined in the Constitution.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:14.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">That Section 318 of the Constitution defines “public Service of a State” to mean service of the State in any capacity in respect of the Government of the State and includes Service as:-<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">(a) Clerk or other staff of the House Assembly;<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">(b) Members of staff of the High Court, the Sharia Court of Appeal, the Customary Court of Appeal or other courts established for a State by this Constitution or by a law of a House of Assembly;<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">(c) Members or staff of any commission or authority established for the State by this Constitution or by law of a House of Assembly;<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">(d) Staff of any local Government council;<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">(e) Staff of any statutory corporation established by a law of a House of Assembly;<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">(f) Staff of any educational institution established or financed principally by the government of a state and<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">(g) Staff of any company or enterprise in which the government of a state or its agency holds controlling shares or interest.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:14.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">Learned counsel continued that the 2<sup>nd</sup> and 3<sup>rd</sup> Defendants and those they represent are employees of Enugu State Government and fall under the definition in paragraph “b” of section 318 of the 1999 Constitution. Therefore since paragraph 1 of the first Schedule defines “essential service” to include “the public service of the Federation or of a state” and section 318 (b) of the Constitution defines the 2<sup>nd</sup> and 3<sup>rd</sup> defendants and all they represent as members of public service, invariably, they are on essential service.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:14.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">He therefore, submitted that the 2<sup>nd</sup> and 3<sup>rd</sup> defendants and those they represent being all employees of Enugu State Government are persons engaged in essential services for the purposes of S.31(6)(a) of the Trade Unions Act. They are therefore prohibited from embarking on strike, and that is indeed an act with potentially criminal sanction for them to embark on strike.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:14.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">Issue (d) is: whether the Defendants and/or all those they represent in this action jointly and severally, by whatever name called may lawfully direct or instruct their members to embark on, or themselves, as the case may be, embark on, strike/ industrial action in respect of an alleged trade dispute with the claimant where the alleged dispute does not arise from the claimant’s collective and fundamental breach of either contracts of employment or collective agreement between it, and the Defendants?<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><b><span style="font-size:14.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></b></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:14.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">Arguing this issue counsel stated that assuming without conceding that the 2<sup>nd</sup> and 3<sup>rd</sup> Defendants and those they represent are not persons engaged in essential services within the meaning of the Trade Unions Act, he submitted that their right to strike is a qualified right that may only be lawfully exercised upon fulfillment of a condition precedent. That the condition precedent is that the reason for the contemplated strike must be Claimant’s collective and fundamental breach of contracts of employment or collective agreement between it and the Defendants. The basis of the submission is explained in the allowing paragraphs.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:14.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">That Section 31(6)(c) of the Trade Unions Act is to the effect that no person or trade union shall take part in any strike unless the strike concerns “a dispute arising from a collective and fundamental breach of contract of employment of any or all of the affected employees represented by the 2<sup>nd</sup> and 3<sup>rd</sup> Defendants or any collective agreement in force inter se.”<b>In Best (Nig.) Limited V. Blackwood Hodge (Nig.) Limited (2011)1KLR(Pt.289) 47 at 61 paragraph B,</b> the Supreme Court held thus:-<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:1.0in;text-align:justify"><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"">There is no gain-saying the point that a breach of contract is committed, when a party to the contract without lawful excuse fails, neglects or refuses to perform an obligation he undertook in the contract or incapacitates himself from performing same or in a way backs down from carrying out a material term. See <b>Adeote & Anr. V. Ayofinde & Anr. (2001) 6 NWLR (pt. 709) 336.</b><o:p></o:p></span></i></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><b><span style="font-size:14.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></b></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:14.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">According to learned counsel, by parity of reasoning, a breach of a collective agreement is committed when a party thereto“without Lawful excuse fails, neglects or refuses to perform an obligation due to him thereunder”. It follows then that in either case of alleged breach such as may give rise to the exercise of a right to strike (under S. 31 (6) (c) of the Trade Unions Act), the contract of employment or the collective agreement alleged to have been breached must be shown to be existing and binding on the parties prior to the alleged act of breach.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:14.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">The case of the Defendants is that Exhibit D2 is “an agreement” reached between the Government and “its workers”, and that the Government is in breach of Exhibit D2 by failing to perform its obligations thereunder. Counsel submitted, however, that contrary to the allegation of the Defendant, Exhibit D2 is not “an agreement”. First, it is obvious from its heading/designation that Exhibit D2 is merely a report, i.e. Report of the Final Committee on Harmonization of the demands of the Judiciary Staff Union of Nigeria (JUSUN) presented to the Honorable Minister of Labour and Productivity. Second, the contents of Exhibit D2 make it obvious that the committee that produced the document was not a negotiating committee involving the government of Enugu of State, the employer of the 2<sup>nd</sup> and 3<sup>rd</sup> defendants. Third, an agreement necessarily presupposes that there is a consensus <i>ad idem</i>, or meeting of the minds of the parties involved on the points contained therein. But by the defendants own showing, there was no consensus between the Government and the Defendants (or Defendants” representative) on the points contained in Exhibit D2. Exhibit D1 was written by the Chief Justice of Nigeria and Chairman Board of Governors (NJI) forwarding to the Government the said report i.e. exhibit D2. Exhibit D3 was written by Honorable Minister of Labour and Productivity forwarding Exhibit D2 to the Chief Justice of the Federation. None of the Exhibits was a collective agreement between the government and the defendant. Exhibit A was written by the defendants to the government and in the opening paragraph clearly stated that they gave the government 7 days <b>to enter into an agreement with the defendants and implement CONJUSS</b>. Exhibit D2 which they called an agreement was made on 19<sup>th</sup> February 2009 while the communiqué urging the government to enter into an agreement was made on 5<sup>th</sup> July, 2010. Invariably, Exhibit A would not have come after Exhibit D2 if there was already an agreement. This confirms the fact that there is no agreement between the government and the defendants.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:14.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">He therefore submitted that in the absence of an existing and binding agreement on how the consolidated Judiciary Salary Structure (CONJUSS) will be implemented by the Government, the Government cannot be said to have breached (much less fundamentally breached) any Collective Agreement in line with the provisions of S.31(6) (c) of the Trade Unions Act. In support of this submission, learned Counsel referred to the decision of this Honorable Court in the case of <b>Hon. Attorney-General of Enugu State V. Nigeria Labour congress & 6 Ors. (unreported) Judgment of the National Industrial Court in Suit No. NIC/ABJ/45/2011 delivered on 16<sup>th</sup> April, 2015</b>. In that case one of the issues that arose for determination was:<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> <i>In any event, whether the Defendants and or all those they represent in this action, jointly and severally, by whatever name called may lawfully direct or instruct their members to embark on, or themselves, as the case may be, embark on, strike/Industrial Action in respect of an alleged trade dispute with the claimant where the alleged dispute does not arise from the claimant’s collective and fundamental breach of either contracts of employment or collective agreement between it and the Defendants</i><b>.<o:p></o:p></b></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><b><span style="font-size:14.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></b></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:14.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">In resolving the said issue similar to the case in point in favour of the claimant, this Honorable Court stated clearly that it is quite clear that for the defendants to lawfully embark on strike action there are conditions precedent that must be satisfied by them. This is predicated on the provisions of Section 31 (6) (c) and (d) of Trade Unions Act. He urged the court to be persuaded by its decision in the above stated suit.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:14.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:14.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">He further submitted that there was no negotiations when they embarked on strike in 2009 which by exhibits A, B and C they want to resume again on 16<sup>th</sup> August, 2010, what the Defendants were statutorily obligated to do was to report the alleged dispute to the Minister pursuant to the provision of S.6 of the Trade Disputes Act. It is only upon conclusion of such process as may be initiated upon such a report to the Minister, resulting in either (i) a memorandum of terms of settlement, (ii) a binding arbitral award by the Industrial Arbitration Panel, or (iii) an judicial award or judgment by this court, that the Defendants may exercise the right to strike (assuming it exists) open <i>(sic)</i> (upon) breach of the applicable document by the Claimant (subject to the provision of S. 18(3) of the Trade Disputes Act).<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:14.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">In this regard, counsel referred the Honorable Court to the provision of S. 31(6) (d) of the Trade Unions Act, which prohibits the exercise of the right to strike, where it exists, unless the provisions of the Trade Disputes Act have been complied with.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:14.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">On the strength of the foregoing, he submitted that it is only upon an alleged breach by the Claimant of a collective agreement/binding memorandum of terms of settlement, binding arbitral award or judgment that the Defendants may exercise their right to strike (assuming they have such right). If they exercise the right otherwise, they would be acting in contravention of S. 31 (6) (c) and (d) of the Trade Unions Act, and S. 18 of the Trade Disputes Act. He urged the Court to so hold and to answer issue (c) in the negative.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:14.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">Issue (e) is: whether the strike embarked upon by the 2<sup>nd</sup> and 3<sup>rd</sup> Defendants on or about 16 August, 2010 was unlawful either as being a contravention of either S. 31(6) (a) of the Trade Unions Act Cap T14, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 2004, or of S. 18 of the Trade Disputes Act, Cap. T8, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 2004?<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><b><span style="font-size:14.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></b></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:14.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">Arguing this issue, counsel submitted that on the strength of his arguments under either issue (c) above or under issue (d) above, or under both issues(c) and (d) above, the strike embarked upon by the 2<sup>nd</sup> and 3<sup>rd</sup>Defendants on or about 16<sup>th</sup> August, 2010 was unlawful either as being a contravention of either S. 31 (6) (a) of the Trade Unions Act, Cap. T14, laws of the Federation of Nigeria 2004 or of S. 18 of the Trade Disputes Act, urging the court to so hold and to answer issue (e) in the affirmative.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:14.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">Learned counsel also urged the Honourable Court in resolving issues “d” and ‘e’ to be persuaded by its obiter in <b>Honourable Attorney General Enugu State V. Nigeria Labour Congress & 6 Ors (unreported) (Supra)</b> where this court stated thus:<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> <i>that the landscape for the right to strike has been critically altered with the passage of the provisions of the 2005 Trades Union Act. It is no longer easily possible for Trade Unions to realistically and legally embark on strike actions on issues of disputes of interest as against disputes of right. It (is) only generally on issues of disputes of rights that workers can now go on strike. This means that the agreements creating such rights must be in existence and breach of same shown before a strike action can be justified. Therefore, where the dispute is over interest, i.e. the workers or employees cannot go on strike lawfully, which means that they cannot go on strike to push for negotiations or sustain same, as that would be disputes of interest.</i><b><o:p></o:p></b></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><b><span style="font-size:14.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></b></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:14.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">On issue (f), which is: whether the claimant is entitled to the reliefs prayed for, learned counsel submitted that the claimant is entitled to the reliefs prayed for since the defendants did no defend the case against them. They neither filed a statement of defence because they have none, nor a counter-claim. Therefore the general rule is that, where a plaintiff’s case is not challenged (as is the position in the instant case) he succeeds. This is because the trial court has no other case to deal with other than the case stated by the plaintiff in his statement of claim and in oral evidence. He referred to the case of<b> Nwabouku V. Otti (1961) S.C., N.L.R. Okoebor V. Police Council (2005) 12 NWLR (Pt. 834) 444.</b><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:14.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">Counsel then proceeded that the claimant in his reliefs prayed for alternative reliefs. That in the case of<b> G.K.F. Limited V. NITEL (2009) 7KLR (Pt. 270) 1899, Ogbuagu JSC </b>stated the law on alternative reliefs as follows:<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> <i>Where a claim is in alternative, the court should first consider whether the principal or main claim, ought to have succeeded. It is only after the court may have found that it could not, for any reason, grant the principal or main claim, that it would now consider the alternative claim. See the case of <b>Mercantile Bank of Nig. Limited V. Adalma Tanker & Bunkering Services Limited (1990) NWLR (Pt.153) 747.</b> In other words, where there are alternative reliefs as in the instant case leading to this appeal, once one of the reliefs is granted, the other relief cannot be granted as there would be no need to do so.</i><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:14.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">Learned counsel continued that the claimant also prayed for perpetual injunction. <b>The Supreme Court per Adekeye JSC in Goldmark Nigeria Limited V. Ibafon Company Limited (2012) 2KLR (Pt.309) 1288 </b>held thus:-<b><o:p></o:p></b></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><b><span style="font-size:14.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></b></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><b><span style="font-size:14.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></b><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"">The grant of the relief of perpetual injunction is a consequential order which should naturally flow from declaratory order sought and granted by court. The essence of granting a perpetual injunction on a final determination of rights of the parties is to prevent permanently the infringement of those rights and to obviate the necessity of bringing multiplicity of suit in respect of every repeated infringement. <b>Afote C.V. MLA (2001)6WRN page 65.<o:p></o:p></b></span></i></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><b><span style="font-size:14.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></b></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:14.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">He therefore prayed that the claims for perpetual injunction should follow as consequential reliefs upon the grant of the reliefs.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:14.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">On the Counter-claim, learned counsel argued that the sole issue is whether there is any counter-claim before the court. He submitted that a counter claim is a separate claim. In order to succeed, the counter claimant must adduce cogent evidence to entitle him to the relief sought. The counter claimant must succeed on the strength of this own case. He relied on the case of <b>Anambra State Government V. Gemex Int. Limited (2012) 1 NWLR (Pt. 1281) 333</b>.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:14.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">He submitted that there is no counter-claim by any standard in this suit and he adopted his arguments in issues(a) and (b). He therefore urged the court to resolve this issue against the counter claimant.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">Counsel summarized and concluded his submissions as follows:<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">(a) That the 2<sup>nd</sup> and 3<sup>rd</sup> defendants did not file any statement of defence in this suit neither did they file any counter-claim.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">(b) The 2<sup>nd</sup> and 3<sup>rd</sup>defendants and those they represent are persons engaged in essential services within the meaning of the Trade Unions Act and as such prohibited from embarking on strike at all.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">(c) He has shown that in any event the 2<sup>nd</sup> and 3<sup>rd</sup> defendants and all those they represent will go on strike. It can only be exercisable upon an alleged breach by the claimant of a collective agreement/binding memorandum of terms of settlement, binding arbitral award or judgment. So in respect of any dispute, until there is in place either (i) Memorandum of terms of settlement, (ii) a binding arbitral award by the Industrial Arbitration panel or (iii) a judicial award or judgment by this court on the subject matter of dispute, they cannot embark on strike on the basis of dispute of interest.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">(d) There was neither (i) a memorandum of terms of settlement (ii) a binding arbitral award by the Industrial Arbitration panel, or (iii) an judicial award of judgment by this court on the dispute as to the manner in which government may implement CONJUSS at the time the 2<sup>nd</sup> and 3<sup>rd</sup> defendants and those they represent embarked on the strike on 16<sup>th</sup> August, 2011.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">(e) The claimant is entitled to visit upon the 2<sup>nd</sup> and 3<sup>rd</sup> defendants and all those they represent any sanction that are available against them under applicable law by virtue of the strike they embarked upon herein.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">In view of all these, he urged the court to grant the claims of the claimant and<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">dismiss the claim of the counter claimant.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.5in"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">Replying on points of law, learned 2<sup>nd</sup> and 3<sup>rd</sup> Defendants’ counsel stated that the Claimant’s counsel heavily relied on the authority of <b>Musa vs Yusuf (2006) 6 NWLR 454 </b>which is a Court of Appeal decision. He then referred to paragraphs 4.8, 4.10, extended to 4.11 of the Claimant counsel’s written address. He then submitted that the decision was delivered based on the consideration of Order 25 Rule 16 of the High Court Rules of Plateau State (Civil Procedure) Rules 1987 which states as follows:<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in; margin-left:1.0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:justify;text-indent:-.5in; line-height:normal"><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">16. Where any defendant seeks to rely upon any fact as supporting a right of set off or counter-claim, he shall, in his statement of defence, state specifically that he does so by way of set off or counter-claim as the case may be and the particulars of such set-off or counter-claim shall be given.</span></i><span style="font-size:14.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">In that case the claim of the plaintiff was dismissed and the court ordered for a retrial of the counter-claim.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">That in the instant case, what is relevant is Order 9 Rule 1(a) of the National Industrial court Rules 2007, simply provides as follows:<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in; margin-left:.5in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:justify;line-height:normal"><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"">Where a party served with a Complaint and the accompanying documents as stipulated in Order 3 of these Rules intends to defend and/or counter-claim in the action, the party shall not later than 14 days or any other time prescribed for defence in the Complaint, file (a) a statement of defence and counter-claim (if any).<o:p></o:p></span></i></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">Learned counsel submitted that this is not the same thing with Order 25 Rule 16 of Plateau State High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules 1987 and the High Court Rules of Anambra State in which the decision in <b>Anambra State Government vs Gemex Int’l Ltd (2012) 1 NWLR (Pt. 1281) 333 </b>was based as captured in paragraph 5.1 of the address. Therefore reliance on this authority is irrelevant.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">That at paragraph 4.4 the statement therein is a false representation of the case of the counter-claimant. Paragraph (a) is as follows:<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in; margin-left:.5in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:justify;line-height:normal"><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif""> </span></i></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in; margin-left:.5in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:justify;line-height:normal"><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"">A Declaration of Court that there is no Trade Dispute between the Government of Enugu State and the Judiciary Workers of Enugu State.<b><o:p></o:p></b></span></i></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">That this misrepresentation was deliberate as the paragraph was skipped at paragraph 4.14 when the address jumped paragraph (b).<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">That paragraphs 4.22 and 4.23 amount to a total misrepresentation of the law, that is to say, First Schedule of the Trade Disputes Act Cap T8 Laws of the Federation 2004 and therefore reliance on other laws as contained at paragraphs 4.24 and 4.25 and the conclusion made at paragraph 4.26 misconceived. First Schedule to the Trade Disputes Act Cap T8 is very exhaustive of what constitutes Essential Service. For the avoidance of doubt, the schedule which has three paragraphs provides as follows:<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in; margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:.75in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;mso-add-space:auto; text-align:justify;text-indent:-.25in;line-height:normal;mso-list:l13 level1 lfo15"><!--[if !supportLists]--><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"">(1)<span style="font-style: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span></i><!--[endif]--><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"">The public service of the Federation or of a State which shall for the purpose of this Act include service in a civil capacity, of persons employed in the Armed forces of the Federation or any part thereof, and also of persons employed in an industry or undertaking (corporate or incorporate) which deals or is connected with the manufacture or production of materials for use in the armed forces of the Federation or any part thereof.<o:p></o:p></span></i></p> <p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in; margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:.75in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;mso-add-space:auto; text-align:justify;line-height:normal"><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></i></p> <p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in; margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:.75in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;mso-add-space:auto; text-align:justify;text-indent:-.25in;line-height:normal;mso-list:l13 level1 lfo15"><!--[if !supportLists]--><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"">(2)<span style="font-style: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span></i><!--[endif]--><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"">Any service established, provided or maintained by the Government of the Federation or a State, by a Local Government Council, or any municipal or statutory authority, or by private enterprise-<o:p></o:p></span></i></p> <p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle"><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:107%;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></i></p> <p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in; margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:1.25in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;mso-add-space:auto; text-align:justify;text-indent:-.25in;line-height:normal;mso-list:l13 level2 lfo15"><!--[if !supportLists]--><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"">a.<span style="font-style: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span></i><!--[endif]--><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">for, or in connection with, the supply of electricity, power or water, or fuel of any kind;<o:p></o:p></span></i></p> <p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in; margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:1.25in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;mso-add-space:auto; text-align:justify;text-indent:-.25in;line-height:normal;mso-list:l13 level2 lfo15"><!--[if !supportLists]--><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"">b.<span style="font-style: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span></i><!--[endif]--><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">for, or in connection with, sound broadcasting or postal telegraphic, cable, wireless or telephonic communications;<o:p></o:p></span></i></p> <p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in; margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:1.25in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;mso-add-space:auto; text-align:justify;text-indent:-.25in;line-height:normal;mso-list:l13 level2 lfo15"><!--[if !supportLists]--><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"">c.<span style="font-style: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span></i><!--[endif]--><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">for maintaining ports, harbours, docks, or aerodromes, or for or in connection with, transportation of persons, goods or livestock by road, rail, sea, river or air;<o:p></o:p></span></i></p> <p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in; margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:1.25in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;mso-add-space:auto; text-align:justify;text-indent:-.25in;line-height:normal;mso-list:l13 level2 lfo15"><!--[if !supportLists]--><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"">d.<span style="font-style: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span></i><!--[endif]--><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">for, or in connection with, the burial of the dead, hospitals, the treatment of the sick, the prevention of disease, or any of the following public health matters, namely, sanitation, road-cleansing and the disposal of night soil and rubbish;<o:p></o:p></span></i></p> <p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpLast" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in; margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:1.25in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;mso-add-space:auto; text-align:justify;text-indent:-.25in;line-height:normal;mso-list:l13 level2 lfo15"><!--[if !supportLists]--><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"">e.<span style="font-style: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span></i><!--[endif]--><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">for dealing with outbreak of fire.<o:p></o:p></span></i></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></i></p> <p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in; margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:.75in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;mso-add-space:auto; text-align:justify;text-indent:-.25in;line-height:normal;mso-list:l13 level1 lfo15"><!--[if !supportLists]--><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"">(3)<span style="font-style: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span></i><!--[endif]--><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"">Service in any capacity in any of the following organizations:<o:p></o:p></span></i></p> <p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in; margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:1.25in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;mso-add-space:auto; text-align:justify;text-indent:-.25in;line-height:normal;mso-list:l13 level2 lfo15"><!--[if !supportLists]--><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"">a.<span style="font-style: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span></i><!--[endif]--><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">the Central Bank of Nigeria<o:p></o:p></span></i></p> <p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in; margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:1.25in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;mso-add-space:auto; text-align:justify;text-indent:-.25in;line-height:normal;mso-list:l13 level2 lfo15"><!--[if !supportLists]--><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"">b.<span style="font-style: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span></i><!--[endif]--><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">the Nigeria Security Printing and Minting Company Limited<o:p></o:p></span></i></p> <p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpLast" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in; margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:1.25in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;mso-add-space:auto; text-align:justify;text-indent:-.25in;line-height:normal;mso-list:l13 level2 lfo15"><!--[if !supportLists]--><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"">c.<span style="font-style: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span></i><!--[endif]--><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">any body corporate licensed to carry on banking business under the Banks and other Financial Institutions Act.<o:p></o:p></span></i></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">Learned counsel continued that a thorough look at the paragraphs 1 to 3 in their entirety will show that the 2<sup>nd</sup> and 3<sup>rd</sup> defendants are not affected. Therefore the entire argument and reliance on section 318 of the Constitution as variously presented at paragraphs 4.22 to 4.26 are of no moment.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">That in resolving the argument that there is no defence or counter claim as captured at paragraph 4.40 to 4.44, the Court is invited to take judicial notice of the statement of defence and counter claim filed by the 2<sup>nd</sup> and 3<sup>rd</sup> defendants in this suit.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">Counsel finally urged the Court to dismiss the suit of the claimant and enter judgment in favour of the 2<sup>nd</sup> and 3<sup>rd</sup> defendants/counter-claimant.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">I have carefully considered the processes filed, the evidence led, arguments and submissions of the parties in this case. The issues for determination in this case are as follows:<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.25in;mso-list:l9 level1 lfo20"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-size: 14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"">1.<span style="font-variant-numeric: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">Whether the 2<sup>nd</sup> and 3<sup>rd</sup> defendants are engaged in the provision of essential services within the meaning of section S.31 (6) (a) of the Trade Unions Act, Cap. T14, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 2004, and as such, precluded from embarking on any strike at all?<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:14.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.25in;mso-list:l9 level1 lfo20"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-size: 14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"">2.<span style="font-variant-numeric: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">Whether in the circumstances of this case the Defendants and all those they represent in this action, jointly and severally can lawfully direct or instruct their members to embark on strike/Industrial action in respect of an alleged trade dispute with the claimant which does not arise from the claimant’s collective and fundamental breach of either contracts of employment or collective agreement between the claimant and the defendants?<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-add-space:auto"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:107%;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.25in;mso-list:l9 level1 lfo20"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-size: 14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"">3.<span style="font-variant-numeric: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">Whether the strike embarked upon by the defendants on 16<sup>th</sup> day of August, 2010 was unlawful either as being a contravention of S.31(6)(a) of the Trade Unions Act, Cap. T14, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 2004, or S. 18 of the Trade Disputes Act, Cap. T8, Law of the Federation of Nigeria 2004?<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoListParagraph" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-add-space:auto"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:107%;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.25in;mso-list:l9 level1 lfo20"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-size: 14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"">4.<span style="font-variant-numeric: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">Whether the claimant is entitled to the reliefs prayed for? <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in; margin-left:3.75pt;margin-bottom:.0001pt"><span style="font-size:14.0pt; line-height:107%;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.25in;mso-list:l9 level1 lfo20"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-size: 14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"">5.<span style="font-variant-numeric: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">Whether the2<sup>nd</sup> and 3<sup>rd</sup>Defendants are entitled to the reliefs sought in their Counter-claim?<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">Before going into the merits of the case, let me give a brief facts of it. The Claimant approached the Court to sue the 1<sup>st</sup>, 2<sup>nd</sup> and 3<sup>rd</sup> Defendants following a threat of a strike action from them. The 1<sup>st</sup> Defendant is a trade union registered under the Trade Unions Act, Cap T14, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 2004 (LFN 2004). The 2<sup>nd</sup> and 3<sup>rd</sup> Defendants were its Chairman and Secretary respectively. There were series of events which happened between the 1<sup>st</sup> Defendant trade union, the Body of Chief Judges of Nigeria, the Chief Justice of Nigeria, the Honourable Minister of Labour as well as the Government of Enugu State. These had to do with agreement over a salary structure payable by state and federal governments to judiciary staff workers throughout the federation of Nigeria. The Defendants have insisted that there was an agreement that a new salary structure had been agreed upon which must be effective from February, 2009. This is the basis upon which they threatened to go on a strike action on the 16<sup>th</sup> day of August, 2010. This threat of a strike action over the issue of salary structure for members of the 1<sup>st</sup> defendant in Enugu State made the Claimant to approach this Honourable Court to seek for the reliefs earlier on outlined at the beginning of this Judgment.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">Furthermore, there is an apparent preliminary issue raised by the Claimant over whether the 2<sup>nd</sup> and 3<sup>rd</sup> Defendants filed any defence to this suit as well as whether or not they equally have a valid Counter-claim before the court. It is the contention of the Claimant that the 2<sup>nd</sup> and the 3<sup>rd</sup> Defendants did not file any defence to the suit just as they also did not have any valid counter affidavit before the Court. The Claimant drew the Court’s attention to paragraphs 1 and 9 of the process of the 2<sup>nd</sup> and 3<sup>rd</sup> Defendants dated 17<sup>th</sup> February, 2015 but filed on 18<sup>th</sup> February, 2015, titled “Amended Statement of Defence of the 2<sup>nd</sup>and 3<sup>rd</sup> Defendants”. The basis of the claimant’s submission is that the 2<sup>nd</sup> and 3<sup>rd</sup> Defendants failed to provide any detail in traverse of the Claimant’s claims and therefore they do not have any defence to those claims of the 2<sup>nd</sup> and 3<sup>rd</sup> defendants. The Claimant further maintained that the counter-claim has not been supported by any detail facts of any averments in its support, which therefore renders it ineffective. The claimant referred to principles of pleading relying on the cases of <b>Gowon vs Ike Okongwu (2003) 6 NWLR (Pt. 815) 38, Musa vs Yusuf (2006), supra, </b>and<b> Okonkwo vs C.C.B. (Nig) Plc (1997), supra.</b><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">On their part, the 2<sup>nd</sup> and 3<sup>rd</sup> Defendants responded to the issue of absence of statement of defence and facts in support of their counter-claim by distinguishing the case of <b>Musa vs Yusuf (2006), supra, </b>relied upon by claimant. They submitted that the argument of the claimant is irrelevant going by the fact that <b>Musa vs Yusuf (2006), supra, </b>was determined on the basis of Order 25 rule 16 of the High Court Rules of Plateau State (Civil Procedure) Rules 1987; whereas the 2<sup>nd</sup> and 3<sup>rd</sup> defendants relied on Order 9 Rule 1(a) of the National Industrial Court Rules, 2007, as amended, which had different requirements from those of Plateau State Rules, interpreted and applied by the Court of Appeal in <b>Musa vs Yusuf (2006), supra.</b><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">Having considered the arguments and submissions of counsel I am of the humble view that the objection of the Claimant is misconceived. The 2<sup>nd</sup> and 3<sup>rd</sup> Defendants have filed their Amended Statement of Defence on 18<sup>th</sup> of February, 2015 dated 17<sup>th</sup> of February, 2015. In it they denied all the claims of the Claimant and proceeded to state what they have presented as their counter-claim against the Claimant. The issue therefore, going by the provisions of Order 9 Rule 1(a) of the National Industrial Court Rules, 2007, rightly relied upon by the 2<sup>nd</sup> and 3<sup>rd</sup> Defendants, is not whether or not they have a Statement of Defence and Counter Claim but rather whether the defence is strong enough to withstand the Claimant’s case and whether the Claimant has any defence to the Counter-claim. This will be determined at the consideration of the merits of the case. I therefore find no merit in the objection as I hereby dismiss same.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">The 2<sup>nd</sup> and 3<sup>rd</sup> Defendants also raised an issue of incompetence of certain paragraphs of the Claimant’s pleadings, namely, paragraphs 14, 15 and 16 of the Amended Statement of Facts establishing Cause of Action as well as claims 1, 3, 4 and B(i). The ground is that they have made reference to provisions of statute and therefore pleaded law and liable to be struck out. Reliance was placed on <b>General Sani Abatcha & 3 Ors vs Chief Gani Fawehinmi (2000) 6 NWLR (Pt. 660) p. 228 at 276 </b>and<b> Anyanwu vs Mbara (1992) 5 NWLR (Pt. 242) 386.</b> The learned Claimant’s counsel did not react to this objection in his final written address.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">Having considered learned counsel’s submission it is clear to me that the dictum of the Court in <b>General Sani Abatcha’s case </b>relied upon by the learned counsel is misplaced. What it clearly states is that a party does not have to state the provisions of a statute before it can rely on it and that what is required is the pleading of material facts. I hereby reproduce the said dictum thus:<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in; margin-left:.5in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:justify;line-height:normal"><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"">whilst it is a principal rule of pleading that a party must plead material facts only and not law, every party is permitted by his pleading to raise a point of law. It is thus not only unnecessary but contrary to the rule of pleading to plead law, statute or sections thereof before reliance can be placed on them. <u>If a party’s case depends on a statute, all he needs do is fully to plead material facts necessary to bring his case within that statute.</u></span></i><span style="font-size:14.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">(Underline mine for emphasis).<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">The Supreme Court in that case was making the point that there were no material facts deposed to by the appellants in answer to the affidavit in support of the Respondent’s originating summons to bring their case within the purview of either Decree N. 107 of 1993 or Decree No. 12 of 1994, the law they were seeking to rely on. In the instant case, the Claimant has pleaded the relevant facts sought to be relied upon by him. I therefore do not see any merit in the objection seeking to have the said paragraphs expunged and I so hold.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">Turning to the first issue for determination, namely, whether the 2<sup>nd</sup> and 3<sup>rd</sup> Defendants are engaged in the provision of essential services within the meaning of section 31(6)(a) of the Trade Unions Act, Cap T14, Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 2004 and therefore precluded from embarking on any strike at all, it is the Claimant’s case that the 2<sup>nd</sup> and 3<sup>rd</sup> Defendants are providing essential services within the meaning of section 31(6)(a) of the Trade Unions Act and therefore cannot embark on a strike action. The basis of the Claimant’s position is that the 2<sup>nd</sup> and 3<sup>rd</sup> defendants and all those they represent are employees of Enugu State of Nigeria. To the Claimant, the 2<sup>nd</sup> and 3<sup>rd</sup>Defendants and all those they represent (hereinafter “the defendants”) are engaged in essential services by virtue of their being in the public service of Enugu State. The Claimant based this argument on the interpretation given to public service by Section 318 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 as amended. The contention of the Claimant is that paragraph 1 of the First Schedule to the Trade Disputes Act defines “essential service” to include service in the public service of the federation or of a state. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">On their part however, the defendants disagreed relying on the full provisions of First Schedule to the Trade Disputes Act. The defendants then argued that they are not engaged inessential services within the meaning of the provisions of section 48(1) of the Trade Disputes Act and the First Schedule thereof.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">Having considered the arguments and submissions of the parties as well as the authorities relied upon by them it is quite clear that the issue in dispute is whether or not the defendants in this suit are engaged in essential services for which they are precluded from engaging in an industrial action in accordance with the provisions of section 31(6)(a) of the Trade Unions Act Cap T14, LFN, 2004. The said section 31(6)(a) clearly prohibits any person, trade union or employer from engaging in an industrial action where the person, trade union or employer is engaged in an essential service. There is no dispute that the defendants are persons that belong to a trade union, the 1<sup>st</sup> defendant, namely, the Judiciary Staff Union of Nigeria (JUSUN) and are employees of the Enugu State Government. The point of departure is about what amounts to “essential service” within the meaning of section 31(6)(a) of the Trade Unions Act as amended by the 2005 Trade Unions (Amendment) Act? The definition of essential service is to be found in section 48 and the First Schedule to the Trade Disputes Act, Cap T8, LFN 2004, which, for ease of reference I hereby reproduce:<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in; margin-left:1.5in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:justify;text-indent:-1.0in; line-height:normal"><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">Section 48 - <b>“essential service”</b> means any service mentioned in the First Schedule to this Act.<o:p></o:p></span></i></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in; margin-left:1.5in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:justify;text-indent:-1.0in; line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in; margin-left:1.5in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:justify;text-indent:-1.0in; line-height:normal"><b><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">First Schedule - Essential services</span></i></b><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""><o:p></o:p></span></i></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in; margin-left:1.5in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:justify;text-indent:-1.0in; line-height:normal"><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> <o:p></o:p></span></i></p> <p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in; margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:1.75in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;mso-add-space:auto; text-align:justify;text-indent:-.25in;line-height:normal;mso-list:l23 level1 lfo22"><!--[if !supportLists]--><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"">1.<span style="font-style: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span></i><!--[endif]--><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">The public service of the Federation or of a State which shall for the purpose of this Act include service in a civil capacity, or persons employed in the armed forces of the Federation or any part thereof, and also, of persons employed in an industry or undertaking (corporate or incorporate) which deals or is connected with manufacture or production of materials for use in the armed forces of the Federation or any part thereof.<o:p></o:p></span></i></p> <p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in; margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:1.75in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;mso-add-space:auto; text-align:justify;line-height:normal"><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></i></p> <p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in; margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:1.75in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;mso-add-space:auto; text-align:justify;text-indent:-.25in;line-height:normal;mso-list:l23 level1 lfo22"><!--[if !supportLists]--><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"">2.<span style="font-style: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span></i><!--[endif]--><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">Any service established, provided or maintained by the Government of the Federation or a State, by a local government council, or any municipal or statutory authority, or by private enterprise-<o:p></o:p></span></i></p> <p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left:2.25in;mso-add-space: auto;text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l18 level1 lfo23"><!--[if !supportLists]--><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height: 107%;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"">(a)<span style="font-style: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span></i><!--[endif]--><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height: 107%;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">for, or in connection with, the supply of electricity, power or water, or of fuel of any kind;<o:p></o:p></span></i></p> <p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left:2.25in;mso-add-space: auto;text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l18 level1 lfo23"><!--[if !supportLists]--><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height: 107%;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"">(b)<span style="font-style: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span></i><!--[endif]--><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height: 107%;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">for, or in connection with, sound broadcasting or postal, telegraphic, cable, wireless or telephonic communications;<o:p></o:p></span></i></p> <p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left:2.25in;mso-add-space: auto;text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l18 level1 lfo23"><!--[if !supportLists]--><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height: 107%;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"">(c)<span style="font-style: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span></i><!--[endif]--><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height: 107%;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">for maintaining ports, harbours, docks or aerodromes, or for, or in connection with, transportation of persons, goods or livestock by road, rail, sea, river or air;<o:p></o:p></span></i></p> <p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-left:2.25in;mso-add-space: auto;text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l18 level1 lfo23"><!--[if !supportLists]--><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height: 107%;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"">(d)<span style="font-style: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span></i><!--[endif]--><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height: 107%;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">for, or in connection with, the burial of the dead, hospitals, the treatment of the sick, the prevention of disease, or any of the following public health matters, namely sanitation, road-cleansing and the disposal of night-soil and rubbish;<o:p></o:p></span></i></p> <p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpLast" style="margin-left:2.25in;mso-add-space:auto; text-indent:-.25in;mso-list:l18 level1 lfo23"><!--[if !supportLists]--><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height: 107%;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"">(e)<span style="font-style: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span></i><!--[endif]--><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height: 107%;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">for dealing with outbreaks of fire.<o:p></o:p></span></i></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:2.0in;text-indent:-.5in"><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height: 107%;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">3. Service in any capacity in any of the following organisations- <o:p></o:p></span></i></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:2.0in;text-indent:-.5in"><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height: 107%;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> (a) the Central Bank of Nigeria;<o:p></o:p></span></i></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:2.5in;text-indent:-.5in"><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height: 107%;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">(b) the Nigeria Security Printing and Minting Company Limited;<o:p></o:p></span></i></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:2.5in;text-indent:-.5in"><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height: 107%;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">(c) any body corporate licensed to carry on banking business under the Banks and Financial Institutions Act.<o:p></o:p></span></i></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">This Court interpreted this section in a decision given on 16<sup>th</sup> day of April, 2015 in Suit No. NIC/ABJ/45/2011, <b>A-G Enugu State vs Nigeria Labour Congress & 6 Others (2015) (Unreported).</b> The court held as follows:<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in; margin-left:.5in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:justify;line-height:normal"><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"">In the argument of the learned claimant’s counsel, he has submitted that the service of the 2<sup>nd</sup> to the 7<sup>th</sup> Defendants is public service and that this mere fact makes them public servants and by being public servants they are therefore precluded from embarking on or participating in a strike action. However, this submission is flawed</span></i><b><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"">. </span></b><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">To start with, the issue under reference is “essential service” which means that in the definition of such qualifying service, the emphasis should be on the type of employment in question which must be tied to the particular work which the persons are engaged in or providing which they cannot withdraw or stop doing on account of a strike action. In other words, regard is to be had to the nature of the work that the employee in question is engaged in, not just whether he is in public service or non-public service, in determining whether he/she is engaged in an essential service. Here, I rely on the rule of interpretation of statutes which allows for the general context of statutes to be taken into account before the ordinary meanings of words used are given. See <b>Chief Obafemi Awolowo vs Shehu Shagari & Ors (1979) LPELR-653 (SC), (1979) All NLR 120 and (1979) 6-9 SC 37. </b>See also<b>NURTW vs RTEAN & Ors (2012) LPELR-7840 (SC) pp. 28-29, paras. F-A.</b><o:p></o:p></span></i></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></i></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in; margin-left:.5in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:justify;line-height:normal"><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"">Secondly, the provisions of paragraph 1 of the Schedule to the Trade Disputes Act reproduced above, upon a clear holistic interpretation shows that the public servants in the public service of either the Federation or of a State must be those who deal with or are connected with the manufacture or production of materials for use in the armed forces of the Federation or any part thereof. Here, it is not just that the law is holding every public servant in the Federation or State by that mere fact alone, as engaged in essential service for the purposes of the Trade Disputes and the Trade Unions Act, but rather that such public servant must be one that deals with or connected with the manufacture or production of materials for use in the armed forces of the Federation or any part thereof. This meaning is more in consonance with the clear stipulation of the statute, for if the argument of the learned counsel is to be accepted, the provision of s. 318 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 as amended, has clearly captured all government service as being public service, and there wouldn’t therefore be the need to further provide for paragraph 2 in the said Schedule to the Trade Disputes Act by which further reference is made to other government services which are now tied to specific functions or duties such as electricity, health, hospitals, fire service, etc. In my humble view therefore, additional services have been added to capture the types of services that would be(sic) come under “essential services” in order to restrict the rights of such government workers to participate in strike actions.<b><o:p></o:p></b></span></i></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">In the instant case, the Claimant has not proffered any different or better argument on the issue. I therefore resolve the issue against the Claimant as I hold that the Defendants are not engaged in essential services as to warrant their being precluded from embarking on or participating in any strike action. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">I will determine issues two and three together. The Claimant’s case is that the Defendants and all those they represent as members of JUSUN, Enugu State Chapter, cannot lawfully embark on a strike action unless it concerns a dispute arising from a collective and fundamental breach of contract of employment of any or all of the affected employees or of any collective agreement in existence and in force. The Claimant placed reliance on the provisions of section 31(6)(c) of the Trade Unions Act. On their own part the defendants relied on the contents of Exhibit D2 to push their case that an agreement was in existence and its breach justified the strike action engaged or to be engaged in by them. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">In considering the issues, it is important to reproduce section 31(6)(c) of the Trade Unions Act, Cap T14, LFN 2004 which states as follows:<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in; margin-left:1.0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:justify;text-indent:-.5in; line-height:normal"><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">31(6) No person, trade union or employer shall take part in a strike or lock out or engage in any conduct in contemplation or furtherance of a strike or lock out unless-<o:p></o:p></span></i></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in; margin-left:2.0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:justify;text-indent:-.5in; line-height:normal"><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">(c) the strike or lock out concerns a dispute arising from collective and fundamental breach of contract of employment or collective agreement on the part of the employee, trade union or employer;<o:p></o:p></span></i></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">This provision is quite clear and must be given its clear meaning. The provision is a precondition set by the law which must be observed by a person before embarking on an industrial action in the form of a strike action or lock out. This precondition is the existence of a dispute arising from collective and fundamental breach of contract of employment or collective agreement on the part of the employee, trade union or employer. This court has similarly interpreted this provision in the case of <b>Hon Attorney-General of Enugu State vs NLC & Others (2015), supra, </b>as follows:<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:0in; margin-left:.5in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:justify;line-height:normal"><i><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"">These provisions of the statute are quite clear and must be given their clear ordinary meanings. See <b>Jabin Onesa Ogaga vs Thomas E. Umukoro & Ors (2011) LPELR-8229 (SC) p. 34 paras. A-D.</b> Here, I agree entirely with the claimant’s counsel that the precondition for the strike is clearly provided for by the Act and the defendants are bound to observe same. The existence of a breach of contract of employment or collective agreement is absolutely necessary before a person or trade union can embark on a strike action, or its corollary, i.e. the right to lock out by an employer. In the instant case, the reliance on Exhibit E by the defendants to say that an agreement exists the violation of which resulted in their strike action cannot avail them. I have taken a careful look at the said Exhibit E. It is a report of a Committee set up by the Enugu State Government on the minimum wage with a view to determining the actual implication of what it would cost the government to pay the minimum wage of Eighteen thousand naira. What is clear from this document is that it is not a collective agreement. It in fact has two salary charts that it worked on and same have been attached to it. Other facts before the court equally confirm that the said exhibit E was not an agreement. See Exhibits A and B which show that the defendants were still talking about proposed salary chart and its implication well after the making and submission of Exhibit E. The total sum of the issue here is that the 2<sup>nd</sup> to 7<sup>th</sup> Defendants had a duty to embark on a strike only where they allege a fundamental breach of contract of employment or that of a collective agreement but this has not been done. Therefore, they have no right to embark on the strike once they cannot show, as in the instant case, that a fundamental breach has been occasioned of a contract of employment or collective agreement. The strike of 8<sup>th</sup> September 2011 too, cannot therefore be lawful in the absence of any breach of any collective agreement as there was none to be breached. This I so find and hold. Therefore issues 5 and 6 are therefore resolved against the defendants. It is perhaps necessary to point out orbiter, that the landscape for the right to strike has been critically altered with the passage of the provisions of the 2005 Trade Unions Act. It is no longer easily possible for trade unions to realistically and legally embark on strike actions on issues on disputes of interest as against disputes of right. It is only generally on issues of disputes of rights that workers can now go on strike. This means that agreements creating such rights must be in existence and breach of same shown before a strike action can be justified. Therefore, where the dispute is just over interests, i.e. the workers or employees cannot go on strike lawfully, which means that they cannot go on strike to push for negotiations or sustain same, as that would be disputes of interests. <o:p></o:p></span></i></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">In the instant case, the Defendants are relying on Exhibits D1, D2 and D3 as the basis for arguing that there is in existence a binding collective agreement the breach of which justified their strike action. The question is what are these documents? Exhibit D2 is titled “REPORT OF THE FINAL COMMITTEE ON HARMONIZATION OF THE THREE EARLIER REPORTS ON DEMANDS OF THE JUDICIARY STAFF UNION OF NIGERIA (JUSUN) PRESENTED TO THE HONOURABLE MINISTER OF LABOUR AND PRODUCTIVITY PRINCE ADETOKUNBO A. KAYODE (SAN) 19<sup>TH</sup> FEBRUARY 2009”. Exhibit D3 is a letter dated 20<sup>th</sup> February, 2009 from the Hon. Minister of Labour forwarding Exhibit D2 to the Honourable Chief Justice of Nigeria, Honourable Justice Idris Legbo Kutigi GCON; while Exhibit D1 is the letter dated 11<sup>th</sup>March 2009 forwarding Exhibit D2 to the Governors of all states in the Federation. The said Exhibit D2 is essentially the bedrock of the defendants’ case that a collective agreement has been reached between the Claimant and the defendants primarily because the Enugu State Judicial Service Commission was represented in the committee that produced it. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">It is the Claimant’s case that Exhibit D2 is not a collective agreement arguing that it is merely a Report of a Committee and not a binding agreement between parties. The Claimant submitted that going by the contents of the said Exhibit D2 it was not the product of any negotiating committees involving the Enugu State Government, employer of the 2<sup>nd</sup> and 3<sup>rd</sup> defendants. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">Having examined the contents of Exhibit D2 it is quite clear that it is a recommendation and not an agreement that can be said to be binding upon the parties. This becomes much clearer with a consideration of the fact that there was no consensus ad idem on the agreed salary structure as two versions were exhibited i.e., Annex I and Annex II with varying contents. Definitely, an agreement would have come out with a one clear salary structure applicable uniformly at all levels, federal and state. This was not the case. Therefore what comes out clearly is the existence of recommendations forming the basis for further negotiations which would have crystallized into agreements evincing specific implementable provisions. This is further borne out by the contents of Exhibits A and A1 wherein the 2<sup>nd</sup> and 3<sup>rd</sup> defendants were demanding for an agreement to be reached between the Enugu State Government and the Union as at July 2010. I therefore have no difficulty in finding that there was not in existence a binding agreement between the Enugu State Government and the Defendants, the breach of which would have justified the strike action of the defendants. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">Therefore in the final analysis, the defendants and the members they represent could only lawfully embark on a strike action upon the fulfillment of the precondition set out in the Trade Disputes Act. This precondition is the violation of existing collective contracts of employment or collective agreement. In this instant case there is nothing before the court to show such a violation. The two issues are resolved against the defendants.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">On the fourth issue, which is whether the Claimant is entitled to the reliefs sought, the Claimant has proved his entitlement to Reliefs 1, 2 and 4(B)(i)(ii) which are all hereby granted. Relief 3 is refused as the defendants and those they represent are not engaged in essential service within the meaning of Section 48(1) of the Trade Disputes Act to be precluded from embarking on a strike action.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">I now move to the Counter-claim of the 2<sup>nd</sup> and 3<sup>rd</sup> Defendants. The 2<sup>nd</sup> and 3<sup>rd</sup> defendants counter-claim as follows:<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-add-space:auto;text-align:justify;text-indent:-.25in;line-height:normal; mso-list:l19 level1 lfo24"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-size:14.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"">(a)<span style="font-variant-numeric: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">A Declaration of Court that there is no Trade Dispute between the Government of Enugu State and the Judiciary Workers of Enugu State.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpLast" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-add-space:auto;text-align:justify;text-indent:-.25in;line-height:normal; mso-list:l19 level1 lfo24"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-size:14.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"">(b)<span style="font-variant-numeric: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">A declaration that the issue between the Government of Enugu State and the Judiciary workers of the State is the implementation of Consolidated <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:14.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><br></p>