Download PDF
<p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><u><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family: "Arial Unicode MS"">REPRESENTATION</span></u><u><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman""><o:p></o:p></span></u></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"">O. I. Barrah, with Jude Ezea Esq and D. O. Aigbadumah for the claimant.</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman""><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"">O. Banmah Esq, for the defendant.</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p> <p class="Body" align="center" style="text-align:center"><u><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"">JUDGMENT</span></u><u><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""><o:p></o:p></span></u></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"">1. The claimant commenced this action on 21st February 2014 vide a complaint and a statement of facts together with list of witness, witness statement on oath, list of documents and copies of the documents. In reaction, the defendant entered formal appearance and then filed its statement of defence together with the list of witness, witness written statement on oath, list of documents and copies of the documents. To this, the claimant filed a reply to the defendant’s statement of defence, additional list of witnesses and witness statement on oath of the additional witness.</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"">2. At the trial, two witnesses testified for the claimant - the claimant testifying for himself as CW1 and Lawrence Ekow Kwofie, who runs a Consultancy firm a Bureau de Change (BDC) in Lagos, also testified for the claimant as CW2 (counsel to the claimant reversed the nomenclatures CW1 and CW2, referring to the claimant as CW2). The defendant on its part called one witness, Franklin Adaghubu, a Human Resources Officer at the defendant bank, who testified as DW. At the close of trial, parties, starting with the defendant, were asked to file and serve their respective written addresses. This they did. The defendant’s final written address is dated 23rd March 2016 but filed on 30th March 2016. The claimant’s is dated and filed on 31st May 2016. The defendant’s reply on points of law is undated but filed on 19th July 2016.</span><span style="font-size: 12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"">3. The claimant is claiming against the defendant the following reliefs:</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman""><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Body" style="margin-left:19.65pt;text-align:justify;text-indent:-19.65pt; mso-list:l0 level1 lfo2"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"">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:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family: "Arial Unicode MS"">An order of perpetual injunction restraining the defendant either by its agent or privies from demanding or compelling the claimant to appear before its Disciplinary Committee or any similar committee or dealing with the claimant in any manner prejudicial howsoever, whatsoever.</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman""><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Body" style="margin-left:19.65pt;text-align:justify;text-indent:-19.65pt; mso-list:l0 level1 lfo2"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"">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:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family: "Arial Unicode MS"">Payment in the sum of Forty-Five Million Naira (N45,000,000.00) being the claimant’s entitlement.</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman""><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Body" style="margin-left:19.65pt;text-align:justify;text-indent:-19.65pt; mso-list:l0 level1 lfo2"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"">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:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family: "Arial Unicode MS"">An order directing the defendant to give reference of career records on demand to the claimant.</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Body" style="margin-left:19.65pt;text-align:justify;text-indent:-19.65pt; mso-list:l0 level1 lfo2"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"">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:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family: "Arial Unicode MS"">The sum of Twenty Million Naira (N20,000,000.00) as damages for the wrongful act of the defendant.</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Body" style="margin-left:19.65pt;text-align:justify;text-indent:-19.65pt; mso-list:l0 level1 lfo2"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"">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:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family: "Arial Unicode MS"">The cost of this suit.</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"">4. The case of the claimant is that he had served as a corper (NYSC) with the defendant and was retained by the defendant in employment as a trainee banker after the NYSC. He rose through the ranks to become a Deputy Manager, serving the defendant for 13 years. He then decided to resign voluntarily from the employment of the defendant vide a letter of resignation dated 20th December 2013, and which was acknowledged and accepted by the defendant. That he expected that his entitlement (severance benefits) would be paid but this was not the case. Instead, the defendant wrote to him vide two letters dated 24th January 2014 and 3rd February 2014 rejecting his resignation and inviting him to a disciplinary committee over an act of gross misconduct, letters that were sent to him after he caused his lawyer to write on his behalf demanding for his entitlements. To the claimant, the defendant’s letters to him were backdated, and were written by the defendant because it anticipated that the claimant would sue. The claimant accordingly filed this action praying for the reliefs he claims.</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"">5. The case of the defendant, on its part, is that the claimant’s alleged resignation was by no means proper/voluntary as it was a calculated attempt by the claimant to avoid the consequences of the misconducts he committed against the defendant. That the claimant had previously been indicted for receiving huge inflows totaling N14,891,910.00 into his salary account suggesting the claimant had other sources of income for which he faced disciplinary committee. That at this material time, the claimant is presently being investigated for insider trading and running a parallel business which conflicts with the Bank’s interest, an act that beaches the Bank’s policy; and while investigation was ongoing, the claimant purportedly attempted to resign his employment. That it was for control purposes to guard against unauthorized access that the name of the claimant was circulated to other units of the bank as a staff wishing to exit the employment of the defendant. That the Human Resources Department of the defendant was oblivious of the fact that the claimant was being investigated when it issued the claimant with an exit clearance form to take round relevant departments for sign-off. To the defendant, only upon the completion of this process from all relevant departments would a staff’s resignation take effect. The defendant went on that mere tendering of a resignation letter without more is not a proper/complete resignation process until all procedures in line with the defendant’s policy on resignation is satisfied; and that a staff is not entitled to severance payments or any entitlements whatsoever merely by tendering a letter of resignation. The defendant denied backdating any of its letters to the claimants. It is the further case of the defendant that the claimant’s purported resignation was in breach and contrary to his contract of employment by not giving the requisite one month’s notice (the letter of resignation states that the resignation is with immediate effect); and that the defendant has a genuine case of misconduct pending against the claimant for which the claimant should face the disciplinary committee. Also that the claimant’s purported resignation is not in line with the policy of the defendant and that the defendant owes the claimant no entitlements.</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p> <p class="Body" align="center" style="text-align:center"><u><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"">DEFENDANT’S SUBMISSIONS</span></u><u><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""><o:p></o:p></span></u></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"">6. The defendant framed two issues for the determination of the Court, namely:</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman""><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Body" style="margin-left:19.65pt;text-align:justify;text-indent:-19.65pt; mso-list:l0 level1 lfo3"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"">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:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family: "Arial Unicode MS"">Whether there is a valid cause of action in this suit which could vest jurisdiction in this Court.</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Body" style="margin-left:19.65pt;text-align:justify;text-indent:-19.65pt; mso-list:l0 level1 lfo3"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"">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:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family: "Arial Unicode MS"">Whether the claimant is entitled to the reliefs sought.</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman""><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"">7. The argument of the defendant regarding its issue 1) is that the defendant as a confirmed staff (referring to Exhibit D2, the letter confirming the claimant), the claimant was obliged to give one month’s notice as per his letter of employment (Exhibit D1), but the claimant did not. And because the claimant did not comply with his contract of employment (Exhibit D1), he does not have a cause of action since for a claimant to maintain a cause of action he must of necessity be entitled to the reliefs sought for; and conversely, where a claimant is said not to be entitled to any relief, it implies that such a claimant has no cause of action, citing <i>Vinz Int’l (Nig) Ltd v. Morohundiya</i> [2009] 11 NWLR (Pt. 1153) 562. That in the instant case, the claimant cannot accordingly maintain a competent suit before this Court as there is no cause of action against the defendant, urging the Court to hold that this suit is incompetent.</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"">8. The defendant argued its issue 2) on the assumption that there is a cause of action. First, it is the argument of the defendant that CW is not a witness of truth as his testimony was conflicting; as such his evidence should not be given any weight, citing <i>Dogo v. State</i> [2001] 3 NWLR (Pt. 699) 192, <i>Oluma v. Onyuna</i> [1996] NWLR (Pt. 443) 449 and <i>Onugbogu v. State</i> [1974] 9 SC 1. The defendant referred to paragraph 24 of the claimant’s sworn deposition where the claimant alleged never to have been invited by the defendant to face a disciplinary committee/panel prior to his resignation (the resignation being in 2013). That paragraph 6 of the claimant’s reply to the statement of defence contradicts this sworn deposition as the claimant pleaded that he faced a disciplinary committee in 2010. Also that the claimant deliberately misinformed the Court that he was discharged by the defendant’s disciplinary committee but later changed under cross-examination by admitting that he was penalized and not discharged.</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"">9. It is the argument of the defendant that the claimant’s resignation was in breach of the agreement between the parties regarding resignation. However, that even if the claimant’s resignation took effect from the tendering of the resignation letter on 20th December 2013, the wrongful resignation automatically disentitles him from the reliefs he seeks from this Court. The defendant went on that the claimant was being investigated for gross misconduct involving insider dealings; and the claimant while raising the defence of condonation willfully admitted his involvement in insider trading, referring to paragraph 10 of the claimant’s reply to the statement of defence. To the defendant, the defence of condonation raised by the claimant cannot avail the claimant as the defendant cannot be said to have condoned the insider dealings of the claimant, referring to Exhibit D3 especially at page 3, which show that the defendant commenced investigation into the matter. That the claimant was invited three times to face the defendant’s disciplinary committee but he used his resignation as a shield. That all of this cannot be interpreted to mean condonation by the defendant.</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"">10. The defendant proceeded to submit that the claimant cannot be allowed to use his resignation as a shield as well as benefit from his wrongful resignation, citing <i>Vinz Int’l (Nig) Ltd v. Morohundiya</i> (<i>supra</i>), which held that a party should not be allowed to benefit from his default or wrong. In any event, that he who comes to equity must come with clean hands, referring to <i>Fasesin v. Oyerinde</i> [1997] 11 NWLR (Pt. 530) 552 at 561. That in seeking the present reliefs, the claimant did not come with clean hands since he even admitted to breaching the terms of his employment by being involved in insider dealings while in the employment of the defendant. To the defendant, the claimant is not entitled to any of the sums he claims since he is in breach of the terms of the contract under which he would have been entitled to the said entitlements. In any event, that the claimant failed to show the Court by credible evidence the breakdown of how he attained the sum of N45 million as his entitlements. That this claim is speculative, and a court of law has no room for speculation. That the claimant for N20 million damages is at best a claim for special damages, which met be specifically pleaded and strictly proved, citing <i>Unipetrol (Nig) Plc v. Adereje (WA) Ltd</i> [2005] 14 NWLR (Pt. 946) 563 at 620. The defendant concluded by urging the Court to dismiss the suit in its entirety with substantial cost against the claimant.</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman""><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p> <p class="Body" align="center" style="text-align:center"><u><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"">CLAIMANT’S SUBMISSIONS</span></u><u><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""><o:p></o:p></span></u></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"">11. The claimant on his part also framed two issues for the determination of the Court, namely:</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Body" style="margin-left:19.65pt;text-align:justify;text-indent:-19.65pt; mso-list:l0 level1 lfo4"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"">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:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family: "Arial Unicode MS"">Whether by the totality of evidence before this Honourable Court the claimant has indeed resigned from his employment with the defendant and whether the defendant could reject his resignation.</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman""><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Body" style="margin-left:19.65pt;text-align:justify;text-indent:-19.65pt; mso-list:l0 level1 lfo3"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"">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:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family: "Arial Unicode MS"">Whether on the straight (sic) of pleadings and materials placed before this Honourable Court, the claimant has proven on the preponderance of evidence that he is entitled to all or any of the reliefs claimed in this suit.</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"">12. On issue 1), referring to paragraphs 12 to 15 of the his sworn deposition as well as Exhibit s C9 (email sent by the defendant to its staffers wherein the claimant listed as No. 10 was referred to as an ex-staff) and C10 (the resignation letter), and paragraph 10 of DW’s statement on oath dated 4th April 2014, the claimant submitted that he tendered his resignation letter to the defendant on 20th December 2013, which was acknowledged by the defendant. The claimant then asked what the legal effect, on his employment, of the letter of resignation dated 20th December 2013 and received same day by the defendant is. To the claimant, despite the fact of his voluntary resignation, which was acknowledged by the defendant, the same defendant curiously turned around in its final written address to contend that the claimant has not resigned his appointment. The claimant went on that resignation takes effect from the date the notice is received and there is absolute power to resign and no discretion to refuse to accept notice, citing <i>Benson v. Onitiri</i> [1960] SCNLR 177 at 189 - 190, <i>Adefemi v. Abegunde</i> [2004] 15 “NNLR’ (Pt. 895) 28, <i>WAEC v. Oshionebo</i> [2006] 12 NWLR (Pt. 994) 258 at 272 and <i>Oyedele v. WTH</i> [1990] 6 NWLR (Pt. 155) 194 at 199.</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"">13. On the defendant’s argument that there is no cause of action on this suit imply because the claimant did not keep faith with Exhibit D1, his letter of employment which spelt out part of the terms and conditions of his employment, the claimant responded by asking the Court to simply discountenance the submissions of counsel to the defendant. That the defendant cannot insist that the claimant should continue in its employment as specific performance is not available to any of the parties, citing <i>Oki v. Taylor Wall Tanton (Nig) Ltd</i> [1965] 2 All NLR 45, <i>NITEL v. Ikaro</i> [1994] 1 NWLR (Pt. 320) 350 at 362 and <i>Union Bank Ltd v. Ogoh</i> [1991] 1 NWLR (Pt. 167) 369 at 388. The claimant continued that even if he did not give the defendant one month’s notice before his resignation, what the defendant would be entitled to is damages in lieu of one month’s notice provided for in Exhibit D1 on the logic that if it were the reverse, the claimant would only be able to recover from the defendant damages which is equal to one month’s salary in lieu, citing <i>Kabel Metal Nig Ltd v. Ativie</i> [2002] 10 NWLR (Pt. 775) 250 at 270. The defendant had also argued that the claimant cannot maintain this action since he did not give the defendant one month’s notice. To the claimant, this submission is preposterous and untenable given that an employee is always entitled to entitlements already earned before a dismissal, termination or retirement, citing <i>Onalaja v. African Petroleum Ltd</i> [1991] 7 NWLR (Pt. 206) 691 at 694 and <i>AG of Cross River State v. Asin</i> [1991] 6 NWLR (Pt. 197) 365. That this Court accordingly has jurisdiction to hear this case, citing <i>Abayomi Adesunbo Adetoro v. Access Bank Plc</i> unreported Suit No. NICN/LA/293/2013 the judgment of which was delivered on 23rd February 2016. The claimant concluded on this point by submitting that the cases cited by the defendant are inapplicable and so should be discountenanced.</span><span style="font-size: 12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"">14. Regarding issue 2) i.e. whether the claimant has proved his case, the claimant, citing <i>Adefemi v. Abegunde</i> (<i>supra</i>), <i>Yesufu v. Gov. Edo State</i> [2001] 13 NWLR (Pt. 731) 517 SC and <i>Tadeggoronno v. Gotom</i> [2002] 4 NWLR (Pt. 757) 453, submitted that there is absolute power to resign; as such he is entitled to the reliefs he claims. The claimant then reproduced his reliefs a), b) and c) and then submitted that Exhibits C7 and C8, letters written to him by the defendant inviting him to the disciplinary committee, are of no consequence and so hold no water in law since at the time they were written, he was already an ex-staff of the defendant, a former staff that cannot be invited to a disciplinary committee, referring to <i>The Shell Petroleum Co. Ltd v. Ifeta</i> [2001] FWLR (Pt. 80) 1614. For his claim of N45 million as per relief b), the claimant referred to paragraphs 25, 26 and 27 of his statement on oath, paragraphs 19 to 24 of his reply to the statement of defence, “Exhibit C10”, the defendant’s Handbook, and DW’s testimony under cross-examination as the justification and evidence grounding the claim. The claimant specifically referred to pages 20 and 23 of “Exhibit C10” and quoted the provisions dealing with gratuity and long service awards. The claimant then repeated his earlier submission that he is entitled to all his entitlements earned before his resignation, citing <i>Onalaja v. African Petroleum Ltd</i> (<i>supra</i>); mores as the Handbook provides for him to be paid his entitlements provided his mode of exiting the bank is not by dismissal. That the evidence of DW under cross-examination that the claimant was dismissed after he was invited two times to appear before the disciplinary committee of the defendant is unfounded and completely unsupported by the pleadings of the defendant; and evidence in support of unleaded fact goes to no issue, referring to <i>Fayemi v. Oni</i> [2009] 7 NWLR (Pt. 1140) at 238. In any event, that the defendant cannot purport to dismiss him since as at 24th January 2014 and 3rd February 2014 he had already exited the defendant bank and was referred to as ex-staff or a former staff, urging the Court to so hold.</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"">15. On the defendant’s argument that the claimant’s reply to the statement of defense is unsupported by a sworn deposition and so cannot be used, the claimant submitted that this argument should be discountenanced as the defendant cannot approbate and reprobate at the same time, in one breath relying on the said reply and in another repudiating it. In any event, that a party is not bound to lead evidence in proof of all the averments in his pleadings provided that he has had enough evidence to sustain his claim or defence, referring to <i>Ezeukwu v. Ukachukwu</i> [2004] 17 NWLR (Pt. 902) 277 SC. That in the instant case, the claimant has enough evidence to cover the pleaded facts and so had no need of a further witness statement on oath. Furthermore, that the defendant’s argument that the claimant’s claim for N20 million damages is at best a claim for special damages, is one argument that is speculative (and <i>Unipetrol (Nig) Plc v. Adireje</i> cited is inapplicable) given that the claim is actually in the realm of general damages, not special damage, citing <i>ANTS v. Atoloye</i> [1993] 6 NWLR (Pt. 298) 233.</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman""><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"">16. On the defendant’s argument that the claimant is not a witness of truth as his testimony is contradictory, the claimant submitted that this should be discountenanced as the defendant is making a mountain out of a “Moore hill” to divert the attention of the Court; and its allegation is mere suspension without proof (referring to <i>Adamu v. State</i> [1986] 3 NWLR (Pt. 32) 865). That the claimant’s evidence is that he was never invited to the disciplinary committee before he resigned and was only invited after his resignation. That it was in his pleadings that he informed the Court that he was penalized by the disciplinary committee to pay N48.000 COT on the amount of his brother’s money which he put in his account and he was discharged thereafter. That the fact that he was discharged by the bank is “born out” when in same 2010 he was promoted to higher rank by the defendant with a fantastic recommendation letter (Exhibit C3) and given a long service award (Exhibit C2). Accordingly, that the defendant is estopped from fronting the same issue as to punish the claimant a second time. That even if there is contradiction in his evidence, he explained and cleared same in his reply to the statement of defence; and so the claimant remains a witness of truth.</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"">17. On the defendant’s argument as to insider dealings by the claimant, the claimant responded that there is single evidence before the Court of any complaint made by any customer (individual or corporate) that the claimant tampered with any account. That the testimony of DW under cross-examination is to the effect that he is not sure if there is any report at all directed personally at the claimant. The claimant went on that he did not surreptitiously resign as the defendant made it out but had discussion with the defendant’s officers and gave them reasons for his exit to pursue other interests having worked for the defendant for 13 years; and that having voluntarily resigned, he is entitled to be issued with reference of his career record with the defendant without any form of hiccups. That he is also entitled to general damages particularly given the unwarranted letters of invitation by the purported disciplinary committee of the defendant even after his resignation on a baseless allegation of insider trading which has affected his reputation. The claimant concluded by urging the Court to grant all his reliefs.</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman""><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p> <p class="Body" align="center" style="text-align:center"><u><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"">DEFENDANT’S REPLY ON POINTS OF LAW</span></u><u><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""><o:p></o:p></span></u></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"">18. In reacting on points of law, the defendant submitted that its contention is not that the claimant resigned pursuant to his letter of resignation, but that the said resignation not being in line with the terms of the contract is in breach of the terms of the contract of employment between the parties. On the issue of insider dealing, the defendant maintained that it raised the issue in its pleadings and the claimant nowhere in his reply denied it; as such what is not denied is deemed admitted, citing <i>Kumbul v. Umeh</i> [2014] 14 NWLR (Pt. 1426) 24. The defendant went on that the claimant failed to show by credible evidence all the claims he makes in this suit and his terms of employment do not support the said claims, relying <i>Oladipo Maja v. Leandro Stucco</i> [1968] 1 All 141 SC (incomplete citation). The defendant also relied on <i>WAEC v. Oshionebo</i> [2006] 12 NWLR (Pt. 994) 258, which held that tendering a letter of resignation by an employee carries with it the right to leave the service automatically without any benefits subject to the employee paying any of his indebtedness to his employer. The defendant concluded by urging the Court not to grant any of the reliefs the claimant seeks.</span><span style="font-size: 12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p> <p class="Body" align="center" style="text-align:center"><u><span lang="DE" style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS";mso-ansi-language:DE">COURT</span></u><u><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"">’</span></u><u><span lang="ES-TRAD" style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS";mso-ansi-language:ES-TRAD">S DECISION</span></u><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman""><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"">19. I heard learned counsel and considered all processes filed and submissions made in this suit. I must first state that the claimant’s final written address is littered with too many typographical (and hence grammatical) errors, essentially errors of malapropism. For instance, issue 2 of the claimant under paragraph 2.0.1 of the final written address talks of “on the straight of pleadings and materials”, when what the claimant means is “on the strength of pleadings and materials”; paragraph 2.0.4.5 talks of “the question what asking…”, when what is meant is “the question worth asking…”; paragraph 2.0.4.7 talks of “… the effect is for the employee to autocratically leave the service”, when what is meant is “…the effect is for the employee to automatically leave the service”; paragraph 2.0.4.10 talks of “damages in line of one month Notice…” and “…damages which is equal to the one month salary in line”, when what is respectively meant is “damages in lieu of one month’s notice…” and “…damages which is equal to one month’s salary in lieu…”; paragraph 4.11 talks of the defendant making “a mountain out of a Moore hill…”, when what is meant is making “a mountain out of a molehill…”; etc. I do not think that errors such as these say well of the advocacy of counsel.</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"">20. Additionally, counsel to the claimant throughout the claimant’s final written address kept referring to Exhibit C10 as the defendant’s Staff Handbook even when in paragraph 1.0.5 he indicated that Exhibit C10 is his resignation letter and Exhibit C11 the Handbook. For the record, and to douse all doubts, Exhibit C11 is the defendant’s Staff Handbook, not Exhibit C10, which is the claimant’s letter of resignation. The claimant’s counsel would also proceed to state in paragraph 4.6 of the final written address that this Court asked parties to address it on the admissibility of the Handbook. It was during cross-examination of DW that the claimant’s counsel asked DW whether the defendant has a Handbook, and DW answered in the affirmative. DW was then shown a Handbook and asked whether it is a copy of the defendant’s Handbook; to which he answered in the affirmative. The claimant’s counsel then prayed the Court to admit same in evidence. Counsel to the defendant objected to the admissibility of the Handbook arguing that though pleaded, the document itself was not listed nor frontloaded. Counsel to the defendant then informed the Court that he will give fuller reasons in the defendant’s final written address. The Court admitted the Handbook and marked it as Exhibit C11 and indicated that it awaits the fuller reasons of the defence counsel. From the defendant’s final written address, the defence counsel addressed only the issue of the admissibility of Exhibits D6 and D7, but not that of Exhibit C11. The claimant’s counsel has, however, elected to address the issue of the admissibility of Exhibit C11 (which like I indicated earlier he erroneously termed Exhibit C10). To the claimant’s counsel, the admissibility of the defendant’s Handbook (Exhibit C11) is well founded in law. That as per the pleadings and evidence of the claimant, the defendant was given notice to produce the original of the Handbook, which the defendant failed to do. That the claimant is accordingly competent to tender the photocopy, citing <i>Agha v. IGP</i> [1997] 10 NWLR (Pt. 524) 317. In any case, that the said Handbook was pleaded by both parties, and DW identified it as the authentic Employee Handbook. To the claimant, documents in support of pleaded facts can be tendered and admitted even though the document itself had not been pleaded, citing <i>Orijiekwe v. Orijiekwe</i> [2001] FWLR (Pt. 338) 1181 and <i>Allied Bank v. Akubueze</i> [1997] 7 NWLR (Pt. 509) 374. Moreover, that it is relevancy that governs admissibility of a document, and the Handbook is relevant to this suit, citing <i>Daggash v. Belama</i> [2004] 14 NWLR (Pt. 892) 144. The claimant then urged the Court to admit Exhibit C11. Like I indicated, the defence counsel did not give the additional reasons he said he would; neither did the defence counsel react to the claimant’s submissions on the issue in the reply on points of law. As it is, therefore, I agree with the claimant’s counsel and the reasons he gave that Exhibit C11 is relevant and hence admissible for purposes of this case. Exhibit C11 is accordingly admitted for purposes of this suit and will be used as such. I so find and hold.</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"">21. There is the issue of the admissibility or otherwise of the defendant’s Exhibits D6 and D7. Exhibit D6 is a document on one Silas Nwaulune written by one Babatunde J. Rufai to Albert Biachi wth the subject being “DM2”. It has two columns labelled, “DM” (with entries such as basic, 13th mth, leave, transport, housing, furniture, utility, etc under it) and “Notch 2” (with monetary figures entered for each entry under “DM” column). The defendant’s list of documents describes Exhibit D6 as “Breakdown of a Deputy Manager’s gross earnings”. Exhibit D6, however, has no nexus with either the claimant or the defendant. Exhibit D7 is a document titled “Transaction Inquiry”. It has an account number (5050001778) and has the claimant’s name on it. On face value, therefore, Exhibit D7 is a transaction inquiry of the claimant’s account number 5050001778. The defendant’s list of documents describes Exhibit D7 as “Claimant’s Statement of Account”. The problem, however, is that Exhibit D7 did not indicate, in terms of the financial institution, where the statement of account was gotten from. In other words, it has no nexus with the defendant bank or any other bank or financial institution for that matter. Can these documents (Exhibits D6 and D7) then be used in evidence by this Court? This was the question the Court posed to the parties. The argument of the defendant is that documents which are pleaded form part of the pleadings and pleadings which are not denied are deemed admitted and so need no further proof. That the claimant admitted Exhibit D6 (referring to paragraphs 19, 20 and 21 of the reply to the statement of defence); and also is deemed to have admitted the facts upon which Exhibit D7 was based since the claimant did not specifically deny same. In any event, that the claimant’s reply to the statement of defence is not supported by any sworn deposition. In response, the claimant urged the Court to discountenance the submission of the defendant and attach no weight to the two exhibits as there is no nexus between them and the defendant, and that admissibility is different from the weight to be attached to the two exhibits, citing <i>Buhari v. INEC</i> [2009] 7 WRN 51. In any case, that even if Exhibit D6 is given any weight, it can only amount to an admission of the evidence of the claimant as part of what the claimant earned. The thing that the defendant seems not to understand is that, as the claimant argued, there is a world of difference between admissibility of documents and ascription of probative value to same. See <i>Dame Pauline K. Tallen & ors v. David Jonah Jang & ors</i> [2011] LPELR-9231(CA); and parties cannot by consent or otherwise admit a document which by law is inadmissible. See <i>Lawson v. Afani Cont. Co. Ltd</i> [2002] 2 NWLR (Pt. 752) 585 CA and <i>Yero v. Union Bank of Nig</i> [2000] 5 NWLR (Pt. 657) 470. The problem with Exhibits D6 and D7 is that, the former has no nexus with either the claimant or the defendant; and the latter has no nexus with the defendant or any other financial institution for that matter. Exhibit D6 is described as breakdown of a Deputy Manager’s gross earnings; but of which company, institution or organisation? Exhibits D7 is described as the claimant’s statement of account; but of which bank or financial institution? As it is, no weight or probative value can be given to Exhibits D6 and D7 for purposes of this suit; and I so find and hold. They shall accordingly be discountenanced for purposes of this judgment.</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"">22. I now turn to the merit of the case, albeit a preliminary issue though raised as issue 1) by the defendant. The defendant’s issue 1) is that there is no valid cause of action in this suit as to vest jurisdiction on this Court. The argument of the defendant here is that because the claimant did not comply with his contract of employment in not giving one month’s notice, he does not have a cause of action since for a claimant to maintain a cause of action he must of necessity be entitled to the reliefs sought for; and conversely, where a claimant is said not to be entitled to any relief, it implies that such a claimant has no cause of action, citing <i>Vinz Int’l (Nig) Ltd v. Morohundiya</i> [2009] 11 NWLR (Pt. 1153) 562. This case by the defendant’s own reckoning stated thus: “A party in breach of contract is not entitled to any relief because there is no relief for a breaker of contract”. In answer, the claimant simply asked the Court to discountenance the argument of the defendant here.</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman""><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"">23. The defence counsel’s argument here is one that may be described as odd or even bizarre especially if the actual meaning of a cause of action for purposes of jurisdiction is taken into account. In this wise, I do not think that counsel to the defendant took account of this in his argument. A cause of action is defined as a factual situation the existence of which entitles a person to obtain from the Court a remedy against another. See <i>Owodunni v. Registered Trustees of CCC</i> [2000] 10 NWLR (Pt. 675) 315 at 365; [2000] 6 SC (Pt. III) 60 and <i>Military Admin, Ekiti State & ors v. Prince Benjamin Adeniyi Aladeyelu & ors</i> [2007] LPELR-1875(SC); [2007] 14 NWLR (Pt. 1055) 610; [2007] 4 - 5 SC 201. In other words, it is a cause of complaint, a civil right or obligation fit for determination by a court of law, and a dispute in respect of which a court of law is entitled to invoke its judicial powers to determine. See <i>Chief Adenigba Afolayan v. Oba Joshua Ogunrinde & ors</i> [1990] LPELR-198(SC); [1990] 2 SC 70. In short, it is the fact(s) which establish or give rise to a right of action - the factual situation which gives a person a right to judicial relief. See <i>Mrs O. Adekoya v. FHA</i> [2008] LPELR-105(SC); [2008] 11 NWLR (Pt. 1099) 539; [2008] 34 NSCQR (Pt. II) 952. In all of this, a cause of action is not that the claimant has to be entitled to the relief he prays for before it can be termed a cause of action as counsel to the defendant seems to think; but it is the factual situation that gives rise to a right of action, which, if proved, would be entitled to a judicial remedy. The argument of counsel to the defendant, if taken on face value and for what it is, would mean that for a Court to decide whether or not it has jurisdiction over a matter it must first ascertain that the claimant will win the case. In other words, counsel to the defendant is submitting that a Court will have to first prejudge a case before stating whether it has jurisdiction to hear the case or not. This surely is bizarre. It is accordingly my holding that there is a cause of action in this suit; and as such this Court is seized with the jurisdiction to hear and determine it.</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"">24. Another argument of the defendant, which I also find odd, is the equation of the breach of a contract with immorality, relying on the Latin maxim <i>ex turni causa non oritur actio</i> i.e. from an immoral consideration an action does not arise, and the <i>Black’s Law Dictionary</i> 7th Edition’s definition of the maxim in terms of a party not having the right to enforce the performance of an agreement founded on a consideration that is contrary to public interest. Both the Latin maxim and the <i>Black’s Law Dictionary</i> stress immorality in terms of consideration i.e. that third requirement (after offer and acceptance) needed for a valid contract to be said to exist. So what is the immoral consideration that counsel to the defendant is referring to here? I do not think that the defence counsel appreciates this fact. The Latin maxim, even as defined by the <i>Black’s Law Dictionary</i>, does not say that a claimant cannot come to Court; all it says is that, if he comes to Court he will not be damnified or recompensed. There is a world of difference between jurisdiction to hear a case and recovery for the case. A Court must hear a case (and so has jurisdiction) in order to say that the claimant cannot recover. Arguments of the defence counsel in this regard accordingly go to no issue and so are hereby discountenanced.</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"">25. The claimant is claiming five reliefs in this suit, the last two of which, reliefs d) and e), are general i.e. respectively the claim for damages and cost. Reliefs a), b) and c) are respectively for a restraining order preventing the defendant from summoning him to face a disciplinary committee, the claim for N45 million as entitlement, and an order directing the defendant to give reference of career records on demand to the claimant. The issues which accordingly arise from these first three reliefs and which call for the determination of this Court are: the legal effect (in terms of the validity as well as the consequences) of the claimant’s resignation from the employment of the defendant; whether the claimant has proved any entitlement to the sum of N45 million; and whether the claimant has proved and so is entitled to be a given the reference of career records on demand by him. I shall consider these issues in the order presented.</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"">26. The claimant was employed by the defendant vide Exhibit C1, was confirmed vide Exhibit D2, was promoted vide Exhibit C3, and was awarded a long service award vide Exhibit C2. In all of this, he worked for the defendant for about 13 years since his employment vide Exhibit C1 dated 1st September 2000. On 20th December 2013, the claimant wrote Exhibit C10 of same date to the Head Human Resources of the defendant. In it, he expressed his desire to resign his appointment with the defendant Bank having served for over a decade. He then stated thus: “I will appreciate this resignation to take effect immediately to enable me attend to very urgent domestic issues”. Exhibit C10 was received by the named officer of the defendant on same date (20th December 2013) as per the two minutes endorsed on it and it was forwarded for processing as per checklist. On same date, 20th December 2013, one Rebecca Olafimihan-Akiula of Human Resources Organization of the defendant sent out an email, Exhibit C9, to named officers of the defendant stating thus: “Please refer to the under listed individuals below now Ex-Staff of Fidelity Bank…” The 10th name on the list is the claimant. Exhibit C9 went on to state:</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Body" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family: "Arial Unicode MS"">Kindly note that this information have been provided exclusively to you to guard against unauthorized access to system rights and properties of the Bank. The noted individuals should henceforth be respectfully treated as potential customers (or customers when they maintain their accounts with the Bank).</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"">As can be seen, all of this happened on 20th December 2013. The claimant indicated that he will appreciate his resignation to take effect immediately i.e. on same 20th December 2013. The law is that the ambiguity of a letter of resignation does not affect its effectiveness; and there would be no equivocation of resignation in spite of an expression of willingness to continue serving if the law permits. See <i>Benson v. Onitiri</i></span><span lang="PT" style="font-size: 12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"; mso-ansi-language:PT"> [1960] NSCC (Vol. I) 52,</span><span style="font-size: 12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS""> What this means is that Exhibit C10’s effectiveness is not affected even when the claimant’s assertion that he will appreciate his resignation to take effect immediately i.e. despite suggesting thereby that some kind of approval is required of the defendant.</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"">27. It is not in doubt that an officer of the defendant received and acknowledged Exhibit C10 on same 20th December 2013. The defendant tried to explain away this. The sequence of events (and hence evidence) before the Court shows that despite receiving and acknowledging Exhibit C10 on 20th December 2013, the defendant did nothing until 24th January 2014 when it wrote a letter of that date (Exhibit C7) referring to the claimant’s letter of resignation (Exhibit C10) and informing the claimant that his resignation was declined by the Bank as he was under investigation for gross misconduct and billed to appear before a disciplinary committee. The claimant was equally informed that the disciplinary committee even met on 23rd January 2014 but the claimant was absent. Exhibit C7 went on that another meeting of the disciplinary committee has been scheduled for 27th January 2014 and the claimant is invited to appear and clear his name on the allegations bordering on gross misconduct. I must point out that even in inviting the claimant to appear and clear his name, Exhibit C7 did not state what exactly the nature of the gross misconduct was that the claimant was accused of and for which he is to clear his name.</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman""><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"">28. Exhibit D3 is an internal memo dated November 1, 2013 from Internal Audit & Investigation to DC Secretary, ‘DC’ being Disciplinary Committee. The subject matter of Exhibit D3 is “Allegation of Insider Trading by Kelvin Nwaigwe Branch Leader of Ojota Branch, Lagos”. It simply states: “We forward herewith the above captioned investigation report for Disciplinary Committee’s action as approved”. The said report (both in Executive Summary and Full Report), which is dated October 24, 2013 and addressed to the MD & CEO by the Internal Audit & Investigation and has as subject matter, “Allegation of Insider Trading by Kelvin Nwaigwe (DM)/Branch Leader of Ojota Branch, Lagos”, is then attached. It must be noted that throughout this report, nowhere in it is it indicated that the claimant was formally invited to answer to the said charges of insider trading. The closest to participation in this investigation by the claimant is an attached questionnaire administered on the claimant; but in <i>Mr. Valentine Ikechukwu Chiazor v. Union Bank of Nigeria Plc</i> unreported Suit No. NICN/LA/122/2014 the judgment of which was delivered on 12th July 2016, this Court held that a </span><span lang="FR" style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS";mso-ansi-language: FR">questionnaire</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS""> in the mold of that attached to Exhibit D3 in the instant case cannot even amount to a query in the real sense of the word. I need to also point out that the audit investigation report of 24th October 2013, which was forwarded to the “DC Secretary” vide Exhibit D3 dated 1st November 2013, when the claimant resigned vide Exhibit C10 on 20th December 2013, the defendant did not communicate their “rejection” of the claimant’s resignation to him until 24th January 2014 when Exhibit C7 was written. So aside from treating the claimant as an ex-staff given the receipt of Exhibit C10 by officers of the defendant, the defendant waited for over a month to communicate its “rejection” of the resignation. This act of the defendant surely signifies that the defendant overlooked, forgave or acted so as to imply forgiveness of whatever it is that the defendant expected the claimant to do so as to validate his resignation. The rule is that an employer who upon the knowledge of an infraction by an employee chooses to condone same i.e. forgive, overlook or act so as to imply forgiveness of the infraction cannot be heard to complain later. See <i>Ekunda v. University of Ibadan</i> [200] 12 NWLR (Pt. 681) 220 CA, <i>ACB Plc v. Nbisike</i></span><span lang="PT" style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family: "Arial Unicode MS";mso-ansi-language:PT"> [1995] 8 NWLR (Pt. 416) 725 CA, </span><i><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family: "Arial Unicode MS"">Nigerian Army v. Brig. Gen. Maude Aminu Kano</span></i><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family: "Arial Unicode MS""> [2010] LPELR-2013(SC); [2010] 5 NWLR (Pt. 1188) 429; [2010] 1 MJSC (Pt. I) 151 and <i>Lawrence Idemudia Oborkhale v. LASU</i></span><span lang="PT" style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS";mso-ansi-language:PT"> [2013] 30 NLLR (Pt. 85) 1 NIC.</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS""> This is what the defendant did in the instant case. I so find and hold.</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"">29. The claimant did not appear before the disciplinary committee and so the defendant wrote another letter to him, Exhibit D5 (same as Exhibit C8) dated 3rd February 2014, wherein the claimant was told that given his failure to appear before the disciplinary committee, a third and final opportunity was given to him as another sitting of the disciplinary committee was scheduled for 10.00am on 7th February 2014; and that if the claimant fails to turn up a summary decision will be reached. The claimant did not again adhere to this invitation. Under cross-examination, DW testified that the claimant was then dismissed but could not remember the date of the dismissal. Of course, at each point that the defendant wrote to the claimant, the claimant’s counsel wrote back insisting that the claimant is no longer a staff of the defendant as to be subject to any disciplinary hearing. See, for instance, Exhibits C5 and C6.</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman""><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"">30. From all this sequence of events, I have no doubt whatsoever that the claimant resigned his appointment with the defendant on 20th December 2013 with immediate effect, which resignation was accepted by the defendant and so is effective; and I so find and hold. All of this is supported by the law. The law is that a notice of resignation of an appointment becomes effective and valid the moment it is received by the person or authority to whom it is addressed. This is because there is absolute power to resign and no discretion to refuse to accept; and it is not necessary for the person to whom the notice of resignation is addressed to reply that the resignation is accepted. See </span><i><span lang="IT" style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS";mso-ansi-language:IT">Yesufu v. Gov. Edo State</span></i><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS""> [2001] 13 NWLR (Pt. 731) 517 SC, </span><i><span lang="PT" style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS";mso-ansi-language:PT">Adefemi v. Abegunde</span></i><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS""> [2004] 15 NWLR (Pt. 895) 1 CA and </span><i><span lang="IT" style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS";mso-ansi-language:IT">Abayomi Adesunbo Adetoro v. Access Bank Plc</span></i><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS""> unreported Suit No. NICN/LA/293/2013 the judgment of which was delivered on 23rd February 2016. In fact, </span><i><span lang="IT" style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS";mso-ansi-language: IT">Taduggoronno v. Gotom</span></i><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS""> [2002] 4 NWLR (Pt. 757) 453 CA specifically held that no employer can prevent an employee from resigning from its employment to seek greener pastures elsewhere. In the instant case, therefore, it is not open to the defendant for whatsoever reason to refuse to accept the resignation of the claimant for the claimant has an absolute power to resign and the defendant has no discretion to refuse to accept the resignation. This being the case, the claimant’s resignation of 20th December 2014 remains valid, effective and hence binding on the defendant. I so hold. Since the resignation is valid, effective and binding on the defendant, the defendant cannot do any thing or treat the claimant as a subsisting staff. The claimant can only be treated as an ex-staff. I so hold. In <i>Jombo v. PEFMB</i> [2005] 14 NWLR (Pt. 945) 443 SC, for instance, it was held that it is elementary that an employee cannot be dismissed from an employment that had ceased to exist; as such, a dismissal coming after the termination of appointment would be a futile exercise. This means that the claimant is entitled to the grant of relief a) but only in terms of an order of injunction restraining the defendant either by its agent or privies from demanding or compelling the claimant to appear before its Disciplinary Committee or any similar committee.</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"">31. The claimant’s resignation was with immediate effect. What then is the legal effect of having to resign with immediate effect as the claimant did in the instant case? In <i>WAEC v. Oshionebo</i> [2006] 12 NWLR (Pt. 994) 258 CA, it was held that a notice of resignation is effective not from the date of the letter, or from the date of any purported acceptance, but from the date on which the letter was received by the employer or his agent; and that tendering of a letter of resignation by an employee carries with it the right to leave the service automatically without any benefit subject to his paying any of his indebtedness to his employer. And by </span><i><span lang="IT" style="font-size: 12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"; mso-ansi-language:IT">NNPC v. Idoniboye-Obu</span></i><span style="font-size: 12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS""> [1996] 1 NWLR (Pt. 427) 655 CA and <i>NEPA v. Isiereore</i> [1997] 7 NWLR (Pt. 511) 135 CA, where a contract of service gives a party a right of termination of the contract by either giving a particular length of notice or payment of salary in lieu of the length of notice and the latter course is chosen, the party seeking to end the contract must pay to the other party the salary in lieu of notice at the time of termination of the contract. It is not even enough that in the letter of termination he offers to pay salary in lieu of notice. See </span><i><span lang="IT" style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS";mso-ansi-language:IT">Abayomi Adesunbo Adetoro v. Access Bank Plc</span></i><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS""> unreported Suit No. NICN/LA/293/2013 the judgment of which was delivered on 23rd February 2016. In the instant case, the claimant resigned with immediate effect and did not give the required one month’s notice as per his contract of employment. This means that tendering of Exhibit C10, the letter of resignation, by the employee carried with it the right to leave the service automatically without any benefit subject to the claimant paying any of his indebtedness to his employer, the defendant. A similar issue presented itself before this Court in <i>Mr. Beloved Patrick Anokwuru v. </i></span><i><span lang="FR" style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"; mso-ansi-language:FR">Omatek Ventures Plc</span></i><i><span style="font-size: 12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS""> & anor</span></i><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS""> unreported Suit No. NIC/LA/140/2011 the judgment of which was delivered on 16th March 2016, and this Court held thus:</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Body" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family: "Arial Unicode MS"">Resignation with immediate effect by an employee carries with [it] three legal effects: the right to leave service automatically; the employee’</span><span lang="DE" style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS";mso-ansi-language:DE">s forfeiture of any benefit; and the employee paying any indebtedness to his employer. The justification for having to allow the resigning employee to leave immediately and automatically is the fact that he thereby forfeits </span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family: "Arial Unicode MS"">[any] benefit he may be entitled to as well as the duty to pay off all indebtedness that he may [have] towards the employer; as such, the forfeiture of benefits inures as contractual consideration for the immediate and automatic separation of contractual relationship as per the employment in issue. So it cannot be that an employee who resigns with immediate effect is allowed to also benefit from such immediate separation by claiming benefits from the employer.</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"">In the instant case, what all of this means is that given that the claimant resigned his appointment with immediate effect he cannot thereby claim any benefit from the defendants. I so hold.</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"">32. Relief b) is a claim for N45 million being the claimant’s entitlement. For this claim, the claimant referred to paragraphs 19 to 24 of his reply to the statement of defence in part justification and part evidence grounding the claim. The claimant (reacting to a submission of the defendant) also argued in paragraph 4.13 of his final written address that even if there is contradiction in his evidence, he explained and cleared same in his reply to the statement of defence. In this submission, counsel to the claimant is suggesting that pleadings (the reply to the statement of defence) can clear or explain evidence i.e. take the place of evidence. I do not know where counsel to the claimant got this proposition from. To the extent that pleadings are not covered by the statement on oath of the claimant originally filed (since no additional statement on oath was filed with the reply to the statement of defence), I agree with the defendant’s counsel that pleadings without evidence go to no issue. The law is that pleadings cannot constitute evidence; as averments in pleadings on which no evidence is adduced are deemed to have been abandoned for mere averments in pleadings without proof of facts do not constitute proof of such facts unless such facts are admitted. See <i>Ifeta v. SPDC</i> [2006] LPELR-1436(SC); [2006] 8 NWLR (Pt. 983) 585. The converse is also true. Evidence given which is not in line with the facts pleaded goes to no issue and so is of no help to the party that produces it. See <i>The Shell Petroleum Development Company of Nigeria Limited v. Kwameh Ambah</i> [1999] LPELR-3202(SC); [1999] 3 NWLR (Pt. 593) 1; [1999] 2 SC 129.</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman""><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"">33. The law is that he who asserts must prove. So the burden is on the claimant to prove his entitlement to N45 million. In this regard, the law also is that there has to be the necessary nexus between documentary evidence tendered and the particular purpose or aspect of the case of the party tendering same. See <i>ACN v. Nyako</i> [2013] All FWLR (Pt. 686) 424 SC, <i>Buhari v. INEC</i> [2008] 12 SC 1 and <i>Hon. Segun Adele & anor v. Hon. Solomon Olamilekan Adeola & ors</i> [2015] LPELR-25972(CA). This requirement of nexus is extended under the law to mean that a party who produces an exhibit so that the Court could utilise it in the process of adjudication must not dump it on the Court, but must tie it to the relevant aspects of his case. See <i>Ivienagbor v. Bazuaye</i></span><span lang="PT" style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS";mso-ansi-language:PT"> [1999] 9 NWLR (Pt. 620) 552; [1999] 6 SCNJ 235 at 243, </span><i><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"">Owe v. Oshinbanjo</span></i><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS""> [1965] 1 All NLR 72 at 15, <i>Bornu Holding Co. Ltd v. Alhaji Hassan Bogoco</i> [1971] 1 All NLR 324 at 333, <i>Alhaji Onibudo & ors v. Alhaji Akibu & ors</i></span><span lang="PT" style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family: "Arial Unicode MS";mso-ansi-language:PT"> [1982] 7 SC 60 at 62, </span><i><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family: "Arial Unicode MS"">Nwaga v. Registered Trustees Recreation Club</span></i><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family: "Arial Unicode MS""> [2004] FWLR (Pt. 190) 1360 at 1380 – 1381, </span><i><span lang="IT" style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS";mso-ansi-language:IT">Jalingo v. Nyane</span></i><span lang="PT" style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS";mso-ansi-language:PT"> [1992] 3 NWLR (Pt. 231) 538, </span><i><span lang="IT" style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS";mso-ansi-language: IT">Ugochukwu v. Co-operative Bank</span></i><span lang="PT" style="font-size: 12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"; mso-ansi-language:PT"> [1996] 7 SCNJ 22, </span><i><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"">Obasi Brothers Ltd v. MBA Securities Ltd</span></i><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS""> [2005] 2 SC (Pt. 1) 51 at 68, <i>Eze v. Okolagu</i></span><span lang="PT" style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family: "Arial Unicode MS";mso-ansi-language:PT"> [2010] 3 NWLR (Pt. 1180) 183 at 211, <i>ANPP v. INEC</i></span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS""> [2010] 13 NWLR (Pt. 1212) 547, <i>Ucha v. Elechi</i></span><span lang="PT" style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS";mso-ansi-language:PT"> [2012] 13 NWLR (Pt. 1316) 330 at 360, </span><i><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"">Belgore v. Ahmed</span></i><span lang="PT" style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS";mso-ansi-language:PT"> [2013] 8 NWLR (Pt. 1355) 60 at 99 </span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"">– 100, </span><i><span lang="IT" style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family: "Arial Unicode MS";mso-ansi-language:IT">Omisore v. Aregbesola</span></i><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family: "Arial Unicode MS""> [2015] 15 NWLR (Pt. 1482) 202 at 323 and 324, and <i>Ademola Bolarinde v. APM Terminals Apapa Limited</i> unreported Suit No. NICN/LA/268/2012 the judgment of which was delivered on 25th February 2016.</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman""><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"">34. Specifically, in <i>Mr. Mohammed Dungus & ors v. ENL Consortium Ltd</i> [2015] 60 NLLR (Pt. 208) 39, this Court held that the rule is that it is the claimant who claims that must prove; and in labour relations, an employee can only claim if he/she shows an entitlement. An entitlement is shown by reference to the law that gives it, the collective agreement from which the entitlement was agreed on between the contracting parties or the conditions of service governing the relationship of the employee and his/her employer. This Court went on to emphasise that a claimant must indicate to the Court the exact provisions of the documents they frontloaded that grants them the entitlements they claim; as such merely frontloading a document and saying that a right inures from it without indicating the clause, section, article or paragraph that grants the right is not sufficient. This is because Courts are adjudicators, not investigators; as such counsel should not expect that it is the Court that will shop for the relevant article that substantiates the claim of his/her client.</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"">35. As per relief b), the claim for N45 million is a claim for special damages. which the claimant in both his pleadings and sworn deposition put as consisting of N25 million (his entitlement as Deputy Manager) and N20 million (his severance allowance as Deputy Manager). In fact, in paragraphs 18 and 24 of the reply to the statement of defence the claimant qualified the sum of N45 million as being an average figure. In his respective words, “…he is entitled to his entitlements and severance payments totaling an average of N45,000,000.00…” and “The claimant states hat he is entitled upon his resignation as a deputy manager an average sum of N45,000,000”. The law is that evidence ought to be led before an award for special damages is granted; and to succeed in a claim for special damages it must be claimed specifically and proved strictly. The fact that it appears to be admitted does not relieve the party claiming it of the requirement of proof with compelling evidence. See <i>NNPC v. Clifco Nig. Ltd</i> [2011] LPELR-2022(SC) and <i>Mr Ignatius Anyanwu & ors v. Mr Aloysius Uzowuaka & ors</i> [2009] LPELR-515(SC); [2009] 13 NWLR (Pt. 1159) 445 SC. All items of loss must be specified by the claimant before they may be proved and recovery granted. See <i>Christopher U. Nwanji v. Coastal Services Nig. Ltd</i> [2004] LPELR-2106(SC); [2004] 11 NWLR (Pt. 885) 552; [2004] 18 NSCQR 895. Furthermore, the claimant has a duty to give specific particulars of the special damages he is claiming. This is to enable the opposing party know what he is to meet in the case. See <i>AG, Anambra State v. CN Onuselogu Enterprises Ltd</i> [1987] LPELR-614(SC); [1987] NWLR (Pt. 66) 47; [1987] All NLR 579; [1987] 9 - 11 SC 197 and <i>Marine Management Associates Inc. & anor v. National Maritime Authority</i> [2012] LPELR-206(SC).</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman""><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"">36. In the instant case, even though the claimant went on in paragraph 24 of the reply to the statement of defence to give a breakdown of what he is specifically praying for, it does not show that the claimant is certain about the exact sum he is claiming for. For instance, in same paragraph 24 of the reply, the claimant pleaded that the breakdown of the N45 million he is claiming is as follows:</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Body" style="margin-left:19.65pt;text-align:justify;text-indent:-19.65pt; mso-list:l0 level1 lfo5"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"">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:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"">N8,000,000.00 being 100% of his gross pay as Assistant Manager in his 10 years of service;</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman""><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Body" style="margin-left:19.65pt;text-align:justify;text-indent:-19.65pt; mso-list:l0 level1 lfo5"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"">ii)<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:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family: "Arial Unicode MS"">N6,171,240.00 being 20% of his gross pay for 3 years as a deputy manager; and</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Body" style="margin-left:19.65pt;text-align:justify;text-indent:-19.65pt; mso-list:l0 level1 lfo5"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"">iii)<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:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family: "Arial Unicode MS"">N10,828,760.00 being long service compensation for 13 years; and</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Body" style="margin-left:19.65pt;text-align:justify;text-indent:-19.65pt; mso-list:l0 level1 lfo5"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"">iv)<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:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family: "Arial Unicode MS"">N20,000,000.00 being other severance benefits and other allowances.</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"">Now, what is the specificity or particularization in “other severance benefits” and “other allowances” as indicated in iv) above?</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"">37. Secondly, in i) and ii) above, the claimant is praying for gross pay both as Assistant Manager and as a Deputy Manager, yet there is no documentary proof whatsoever of the claimant’s gross pay as per these offices/posts. Only Exhibit C1 as accepted by the claimant on 20-09-2000 has under Remuneration “N450,000 gross per annum” as salary. This of course is not what the claimant is praying for as per relief b). Other than Exhibit C1, the claimant did not even deem it fit to frontload his pay-slip or documentary evidence of his salary (whether gross or net) as at the point of resignation. The only ‘relevant’ evidence before the Court is the oral testimony of the claimant in paragraph 25 of his sworn deposition that the emolument of a Deputy Manager in the employment of the defendant is N25 million and that as such he is entitled to this sum; and paragraphs 26 and 27 of same deposition which state that his severance allowances is N20 million. Oral testimony cannot ground monetary claims of this sort. Even when in paragraphs 3.0.16 and 3.0.17 of the final written address the counsel to the claimant referred to the Handbook (Exhibit C11) in terms of gratuity and long service award, that was giving evidence - and counsel cannot give evidence. The law is that counsel’s address cannot be a substitute for pleadings or evidence. See <i>UBN Plc & anor v. Ayodare & Sons (Nig.) Ltd & anor</i> [2007] LPELR-3391(SC); [2007] 13 NWLR (Pt. 1052) 567; [2007] 4 - 5 SC 42 and <i>PDP & anor v. INEC & ors</i> [2012] LPELR-9225(CA).</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman""><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"">38. Thirdly, paragraph 24 of the reply to the statement of defence is part of pleadings and so is a pleading, not evidence in its own right. It accordingly suffers from the principle that pleadings without evidence goes to no issue. See <i>Ifeta v. SPDC</i> [2006] LPELR-1436(SC); [2006] 8 NWLR (Pt. 983) 585.</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman""><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"">39. Fourthly, the requirement (and hence duty) to link documentary evidence tendered with the particular purpose or aspect of the case of the party tendering same (<i>ACN v. Nyako,</i> <i>Buhari v. INEC</i> and <i>Hon. Segun Adele & anor v. Hon. Solomon Olamilekan Adeola & ors</i> - all <i>supra</i>) is that of the claimant, not that of his counsel given that counsel cannot give evidence in the written address.</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"">40. Lastly, the attempt by the claimant to rely on Exhibit D6 as evidence of the salary of a Deputy Manager cannot hold as I have already discountenanced this piece of evidence as having no weight or probative/evidential value.</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman""><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"">41. On the whole, the claimant has not prove any entitlement to N45 million as claimed as per relief b). Relief b) cannot accordingly be granted. It is hereby dismissed.</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"">42. Relief c) is for an order directing the defendant to give reference of career records on demand to the claimant. The claimant claims this relief as per paragraph 31 of the statement of facts and paragraph 32 of his sworn deposition. Order than a general denial of all the claims of the claimants (see paragraph 27 of the statement of defence) and the submission in paragraph 4.44 of the defendant’s final written address that “the claimant is not entitled to any of the reliefs sought”, nothing much in terms of a legal submission on this relief is said. The claimant on his part did not say much either. The only ‘legal’ submission of the claimant on this relief is to be found in paragraph 4.27 of the claimant’s final written address; and it is to the effect that “since by the evidence before [the Court], the Claimant exited the Defendant Bank by voluntary Resignation, it is standard practice that in accordance with his [claims]…that he [is] entitled to be issued with reference of his career records with the Defendant without any form of hiccups…” Of course, this submission is unsupported by any legal authority. I am not aware of any case in Nigeria that dealt with the issue of the law on employment or work references; as such I had to look elsewhere. My reading accordingly reveals that <i>generally</i> there is no obligation on an employer to give a work reference except there is a written agreement to do so or the employer is in a regulated industry such as financial services; and i</span><span lang="DE" style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family: "Arial Unicode MS";mso-ansi-language:DE">n discharging </span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family: "Arial Unicode MS"">the obligation to give the work reference, the requirement of law is that the work reference must be fair, accurate and not misleading to a future employer. The rationale (and hence necessity) for a work reference can be found in the words of Lord Slynn in </span><i><span lang="NL" style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family: "Arial Unicode MS";mso-ansi-language:NL">Spring v</span></i><i><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family: "Arial Unicode MS"">. Guardian Assurance</span></i><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS""> </span><span lang="PT" style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS";mso-ansi-language:PT">[1995] 2 AC 296</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family: "Arial Unicode MS""> at 335 i.e. </span><span lang="DE" style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"; mso-ansi-language:DE">“</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"">It is a relevant circumstance that, in many cases an employee will stand no chance of getting another job, let alone a better job, unless he has been given a reference”. As Thompsons Solicitors put it at </span><span class="Hyperlink0"><a href="http://www.thompsons.law.co.uk/ltext/l0930005.htm"><u><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS";color:black;text-underline:black; text-decoration:none;text-underline:none">http://www.thompsons.law.co.uk/ltext/l0930005.htm</span></u></a></span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family: "Arial Unicode MS""> as accessed on 24th December 2016, “Careless words cost jobs”. They assert that legally an employer has no obligation to provide an employee with a reference at all; but if he does provide a reference, he owes a duty of care against negligent mis-statement i.e. not to mislead or misrepresent to the person (usually a potential employer or the employee him/herself) to whom the reference is provided.</span><span style="font-size: 12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"">42. The duo of Peter McInnes, Partner and Aoife Henry, Solicitor, of Mason Hayes+Curran in their online article titled, “Damned by faint praise: The law on employment references” available at </span><span class="Hyperlink0"><a href="http://www.mhc.ie/fs/doc/publications/Damned_by_Faint_Praise_-_The_law_on_employment_references_by_Peter_McInnes_and_Aoife_Henry_April_2006.pdf"><u><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS";color:black;text-underline:black; text-decoration:none;text-underline:none">http://www.mhc.ie/fs/doc/publications/Damned_by_Faint_Praise_-_The_law_on_employment_references_by_Peter_McInnes_and_Aoife_Henry_April_2006.pdf</span></u></a></span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family: "Arial Unicode MS""> as accessed on 21st December 2016, however, indicate the legal position in this words:</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Body" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family: "Arial Unicode MS"">While one used to be able to say with a reasonable degree of confidence that there was no absolute obligation on employers to provide an employee with a reference, case law in the UK has developed a number of exceptions to the proposition. It would now appear that, in certain circumstances, an employee can require an employer to give a reference. UK case law suggests that it may be appropriate in some cases to imply a term into a contract of employment that the employer will provide the employee with a reference at the request of a prospective employer…</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman""><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"">The duo came to this conclusion on the basis of case law authorities such as </span><i><span lang="NL" style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS";mso-ansi-language:NL">Spring v</span></i><i><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family: "Arial Unicode MS"">. Guardian Assurance</span></i><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS""> (<i>supra</i>), <i>Kidd v. Axa Equity & Life Assurance Society P</i></span><i><span lang="DE" style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS";mso-ansi-language:DE">lc</span></i><i><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family: "Arial Unicode MS""> & anor</span></i><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS""> [2000] IRLR 301 HC (QBD), <i>Cox & Cross v. Sun Alliance Life Ltd</i> [2001] IRLR 448 and <i>Bartholomew v. Hackney London Borough and anor</i> [1999] IRLR 246.</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"">43. In </span><i><span lang="NL" style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS";mso-ansi-language:NL">Spring v</span></i><i><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family: "Arial Unicode MS"">. Guardian Assurance</span></i><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"">, the plaintiff was dismissed from office by the d</span><span lang="FR" style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family: "Arial Unicode MS";mso-ansi-language:FR">efendant</span><span style="font-size: 12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS""> (an insurance company and hence a financial institution). He got another job which required a work reference from the defendant. The work reference given by the defendant was not favourable, described by the trial judge, Judge Lever QC, as the </span><span lang="DE" style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS";mso-ansi-language:DE">“</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family: "Arial Unicode MS"">kiss of death”). In consequence, the plaintiff lost the new job and so brought an action against his former employer on several grounds including negligent misstatement, malicious falsehood and breach of contract, but not defamation. An action in defamation (but not for the tort of negligence) would have entitled the defendant to the defence of qualified privilege. The House of Lords held that an employer who gives a reference in respect of a former employee owed that employee a duty to take reasonable care in its preparation and would be liable to him in negligence if he failed to do so and the employee thereby suffered economic damage. The House of Lords also held that an implied term of the contract existed between the plaintiff and the defendant to ensure that reasonable care was taken in the compiling and giving of the work reference, and that the defendant was in breach of that implied term. Lord Slynn in the House of Lords commented that, even if there is no universal duty on an employer to give a reference, it would seem that contracts may exist when it is necessary to imply such a duty. It was Lord Woolf (as he then was) who attempted to specify the circumstances which would enable such a term to be implied. Those circumstances are: the existence of the contract of employment or of services; the fact that the contract relates to an engagement of a class where it is normal practice to require a reference from a previous employer before employment is offered; and the fact that the employee cannot be expected to enter into a class of employment, except on the basis that the employer will on the request of another employer, made not less than a reasonable time after the termination of the previous employment, provide a full and frank reference to the employer. The duo of Peter McInnes and Aoife Henry then concluded that the existence of an obligation to provide a reference was approved by subsequent UK cases, also in the insurance industry, such as <i>Kidd v. Axa Equity & Life Assurance Society P</i></span><i><span lang="DE" style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family: "Arial Unicode MS";mso-ansi-language:DE">lc</span></i><span style="font-size: 12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS""> (<i>supra</i>) and <i>Cox & Cross v. Sun Alliance Life Ltd</i> (<i>supra</i>).</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman""><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"">44. In another UK case, <i>Bartholomew v. Hackney London Borough and anor</i> [1999] IRLR 246, the Court of Appeal held that in giving a reference to a former employee, a former employer owes a duty of care to the former employee to provide a reference which is true, accurate and</span><span lang="FR" style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family: "Arial Unicode MS";mso-ansi-language:FR"> fair</span><span style="font-size: 12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"">; fairness determined by having regard to the whole of the reference and the surrounding context, as a number of discrete statements, though factually accurate in themselves, could nevertheless read as a whole give an unfair or potentially unfair impression to a recipient of the reference. However, that it is not necessary that a reference in every case be full and comprehensive. <i>Kidd v. Axa Equity & Life Assurance Society P</i></span><i><span lang="DE" style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family: "Arial Unicode MS";mso-ansi-language:DE">lc</span></i><span style="font-size: 12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS""> (<i>supra</i>), in holding that whilst a reference must not mislead, there is no further obligation on an employer to make the reference full and comprehensive, followed <i>Bartholomew</i>. In <i>TSB Bank Plc v.</i></span><i><span lang="IT" style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS";mso-ansi-language:IT"> Harris</span></i><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family: "Arial Unicode MS""> [2000] IRLR 157, a reference provided to a potential employer for an existing employee which disclosed customer complaints unknown to the employee, was found to be a breach of the employer’s duty and was held to be a breach of trust and confidence to disclose complaints to others, if the employee was not given an opportunity to answer them. And in <i>Cox & Cross v. Sun Alliance Life Ltd</i> (<i>supra</i>), the Court of Appeal made it clear that the question of whether an employer who provides a reference for a former employee is in breach of the duty to take reasonable care to ensure that the reference is accurate and fair will usually involve making reasonable inquiry into the factual basis of the statements in the reference. Accordingly, a verbal reference by Sun Alliance suggesting that Mr Cox had been suspended pending an investigation into allegations of dishonesty and that he would have been dismissed had he not resigned thus suggesting that his honesty had been in question, despite an agreement between the parties to the effect that a question as to the reason for the termination of Mr Cox’s employment would be answered by saying that Mr Cox had resigned, and that any request for “your impression of the applicant as an employee together with any additional information which you feel may be helpful to us”, would be answered in accordance with an agreed resume of Mr Cox’s career, which agreed resume was favourable and interestingly made no reference to the dispute, was </span><span lang="NL" style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS";mso-ansi-language:NL">held t</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family: "Arial Unicode MS"">o be negligence on the part of</span><span lang="FR" style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family: "Arial Unicode MS";mso-ansi-language:FR"> Sun Alliance</span><span lang="FR" style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family: "Arial Unicode MS""> </span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"">and that this negligence had caused Mr Cox’s subsequent employment difficulties.</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"">45. After considering <i>Cox</i>, Martin Edwards of</span><span lang="ES-TRAD" style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family: "Arial Unicode MS";mso-ansi-language:ES-TRAD"> Mace & Jones, Liverpoo</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family: "Arial Unicode MS"">l writing on “Employment Law” at </span><span class="Hyperlink0"><a href="https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/news/employment-law/34521.article"><u><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS";color:black;text-underline:black; text-decoration:none;text-underline:none">https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/news/employment-law/34521.article</span></u></a></span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family: "Arial Unicode MS""> as accessed on 24th December 2016 accordingly cautions that an employer should confine unfavourable statements about the employee to those matters into which he has made reasonable investigation and has reasonable grounds for believing to be true; and if an investigation is discontinued, unfavourable comments should be confined to matters that were investigated before the employee’</span><span lang="FR" style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"; mso-ansi-language:FR">s departure.</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS""> As a practical matter, therefore, Lord Justice Mummery in <i>Cox v. Sun Alliance Life Ltd</i> said thus: “In a case where the terms of an agreed resignation or of the compromise of an unfair dismissal claim make provision for the supply of a reference, the parties should ensure as far as possible that the exact wording of a fair and accurate reference is fully discussed, clearly agreed and carefully recorded in writing…at the same time as other severance terms”.</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"">46. I am persuaded by the force of these UK case law authorities that in appropriate cases there is an implied term in contracts of employment imposing duty on the employer to provide work reference in respect of its employee, whether former or existing. The defendant in the instant case is a Bank and hence a financial institution. This means that the defendant has an obligation to give a work reference to, or in respect of, the claimant, which work reference must be true, accurate, fair and not misleading to a future employer; and I so find and hold. In this respect, relief c) claimed by the claimant succeeds in terms of the defendant giving a true, accurate, fair and not misleading reference of career record on demand to the claimant.</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman""><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"">47. Relief d) is for N20 million as damages for the wrongful act of the defendant. The argument of the defendant is that this sum is for general damages, which he is entitled to particularly given the unwarranted letters of invitation by the purported disciplinary committee of the defendant even after his resignation on a baseless allegation of insider trading which has affected his reputation. Except for <i>British Airways v. Makanjuola</i></span><span lang="PT" style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family: "Arial Unicode MS";mso-ansi-language:PT"> [1993] 8 NWLR (Pt. 311) 276</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family: "Arial Unicode MS"">, which held that the quantum of damages recoverable by an employee depends on whether the wrongful termination of employment was as a result of the failure to give the required notice or as a result of an alleged malpractice (and if the former, the quantum of damages may be the employee’s salary in lieu of notice, but if the latter then since such a termination carries with it some stigma on the character of the employee, he shall be entitled to substantial damages far beyond the payment of salary in lieu of notice), case law authorities are generally agreed that employment cases are inappropriate for claiming for a traduced reputation. By <i>Agbo v. CBN</i> [1996] 10 NWLR (Pt. 478) 379 CA, for instance, an employee cannot rely on wrongful termination of appointment as cause of action to clear his name for the future, among other purposes; his recourse in an appropriate case may be in an action for defamation. In </span><i><span lang="IT" style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"; mso-ansi-language:IT">Baba v. Nigerian Civil Aviation Training Centre</span></i><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family: "Arial Unicode MS""> [1986] 5 NWLR (Pt. 42) 514, it was held that no compensation can be claimed in respect of injury done to the employee’s feelings by his dismissal nor in respect of difficulty in finding an alternative work. </span><i><span lang="IT" style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS";mso-ansi-language: IT">Katto v</span></i><i><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"">.</span></i><i><span lang="NL" style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family: "Arial Unicode MS";mso-ansi-language:NL"> CBN</span></i><span lang="NL" style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family: "Arial Unicode MS";mso-ansi-language:PT"> </span><span lang="PT" style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family: "Arial Unicode MS";mso-ansi-language:PT">[1999] 6 NWLR (Pt. 607) 390 SC,</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family: "Arial Unicode MS""> on its part, held that where employment is determined in circumstances which may bring the employee into hatred, contempt or ridicule, but the employer had not used and published any defamatory words against the employee in terminating his employment, the employer cannot be held liable in defamation. And by </span><i><span lang="DE" style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS";mso-ansi-language: DE">Onwuneme v. ACB Plc</span></i><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS""> [1997] 12 NWLR (Pt. 513) 150 CA, damages for injury to reputation arising from wrongful dismissal are irrecoverable unless the injury results in a pecuniary loss. </span><i><span lang="PT" style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS";mso-ansi-language:PT">UTC v</span></i><i><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family: "Arial Unicode MS"">. Mokoruku</span></i><span lang="PT" style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"; mso-ansi-language:PT"> [1993] 3 NWLR (Pt. 281) 295 CA</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family: "Arial Unicode MS""> even went to the extreme of holding that it is inappropriate to award general damages in a breach of contract of employment, as award of general damages is known only in the law of tort.</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman""><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"">48. In the instant case, the defendant did not terminate or dismiss the claimant. Instead, it was the claimant who resigned with immediate effect. So the question of recovering for wrongful termination or wrongful dismissal does not arise. His claim for general damages is for “the unwarranted letters of invitation by the purported disciplinary committee of the defendant even after his resignation on a baseless allegation of insider trading which has affected his reputation”. If the claimant thinks that the acts of the defendant affected his reputation, the appropriate cause of action is one for defamation, which this Court of course has no jurisdiction over. The claimant cannot sidetrack the strict requirements of proving defamation (such as proof of defamatory imputation and proof of publication to persons other that the claimant) in preference for an action of the sort of the instant action in this Court. As it is, therefore, this Court cannot litigate or even grant relief d) as claimed. Even if this Court can, the claimant has not proved how he arrived at N20 million. Simply asking for N20 million as damages does not establish an entitlement and the quantum of that entitlement. Relief d) accordingly fails and is hereby dismissed.</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"">49. Relief e) is for cost. Although cost follows the event in litigation, the award of cost is at the discretion of the Court, which discretion is to be exercised judiciously and judicially. See <i>NNPC v. Clifco Nig. Ltd</i> [2011] LPELR-2022(SC).</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"">50. In all, for the reasons given, and for the avoidance of doubt, the claimant’s case succeeds in part in terms of reliefs a) and c) but only in terms of the following orders:</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Body" style="margin-left:19.65pt;text-align:justify;text-indent:-19.65pt; mso-list:l0 level1 lfo6"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"">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:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family: "Arial Unicode MS"">The defendant either by its agent or privies is hereby restrained from demanding or compelling the claimant to appear before its Disciplinary Committee or any similar committee.</span><span style="font-size: 12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Body" style="margin-left:19.65pt;text-align:justify;text-indent:-19.65pt; mso-list:l0 level1 lfo3"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-hansi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"">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:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family: "Arial Unicode MS"">The defendant is hereby ordered to give reference of career records on demand to the claimant, which reference must be true, fair, accurate and not misleading.</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"">51. Judgment is entered accordingly. I make no order as to cost.</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman""><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p> <p class="Body" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p> <p class="Body" align="center" style="text-align:center"><span style="font-size: 12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family:"Arial Unicode MS"">……………………………………</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman""><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Body" align="center" style="text-align:center"><span lang="IT" style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-font-family: "Arial Unicode MS";mso-ansi-language:IT">Hon. Justice B. B. Kanyip, PhD</span><o:p></o:p></p>