Download PDF
<p class="MsoNoSpacing"><b><u><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS"">Representation:<o:p></o:p></span></u></b></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Comic Sans MS"">Julius Ekeoma for the Claimant/Respondent<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Comic Sans MS"">Chief H. N. Duruoha for the Defendant/Applicant<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing"><span style="font-size:8.0pt;font-family:"Comic Sans MS""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" align="center" style="text-align:center"><b><u><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-bidi-language:HE">RULING</span></u></b><b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family: "Comic Sans MS";mso-bidi-language:HE"><o:p></o:p></span></b></p> <p class="Style" style="margin-right:40.3pt;text-align:justify"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-font-width:105%;mso-bidi-language:HE">This ruling is premised on a Motion on Notice dated and filed on the 1<sup>st</sup> day of August 2016 and brought pursuant to</span><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family: "Comic Sans MS";mso-font-width:89%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language: HE;mso-bidi-font-weight:bold"> </span><i><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS"; mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE">Orders </span></i><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language: HE">11(1) <i>and </i>15 of the National Industrial Court Rules, 2007 and the inherent jurisdiction of this Court, wherein the Defendant/Applicant seeks the <b><i>Order <br> of this Court striking out this suit on the grounds that: </i></b><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Style" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:35.5pt;margin-bottom:0in; margin-left:116.85pt;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:justify;text-indent:-34.05pt; mso-list:l4 level1 lfo1"><!--[if !supportLists]--><i><span style="color:#35353B; mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE">1.<span style="font-style: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal;"> </span></span></i><!--[endif]--><i><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS"; mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE">The suit is pre-mature, no dispute having been <br> disclosed between parties. <o:p></o:p></span></i></p> <p class="Style" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:35.5pt;margin-bottom:0in; margin-left:116.85pt;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:justify;text-indent:-34.05pt; mso-list:l4 level1 lfo1"><!--[if !supportLists]--><i><span style="color:#35353B; mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE">2.<span style="font-style: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal;"> </span></span></i><!--[endif]--><i><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS"; mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE">No cause of action has been disclosed against <br> Defendant.<o:p></o:p></span></i></p> <p class="Style" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:35.5pt;margin-bottom:0in; margin-left:116.85pt;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:justify;text-indent:-34.05pt; mso-list:l4 level1 lfo1"><!--[if !supportLists]--><i><span style="color:#35353B; mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE">3.<span style="font-style: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal;"> </span></span></i><!--[endif]--><i><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS"; mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE">The Statement of Facts establishing the cause of action and other documents filed by Claimant are improperly signed, filed and served, having not been sealed as provided for by law.<o:p></o:p></span></i></p> <p class="Style" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS"; mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE">The application is supported by a six-paragraph affidavit deposed to by one Ndubueze Okoronkwo, a banker of Defendant/Applicant’s PGD’s Place, Plot 4, Block 5, Landbridge Avenue Oniru, off Lekki-Ekpe Expressway, Lagos.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Style" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:4.0pt; font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE"> </span></p> <p class="Style" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS"; mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE">In the accompanying address, Counsel proposed two issues to be determined as follows:<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Style" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:.75pt;margin-bottom:0in; margin-left:63.6pt;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:justify;text-indent:-36.2pt; mso-list:l1 level1 lfo2"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="color:#34353B; mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE">a.<span style="font-variant-numeric: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal;"> </span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS"; mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE">Whether Claimant has disclosed enough facts to warrant the Court <br> looking into this case. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Style" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:1.2pt;margin-bottom:0in; margin-left:64.3pt;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:justify;text-indent:-36.95pt; mso-list:l1 level1 lfo3"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="color:#34353B; mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE">b.<span style="font-variant-numeric: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal;"> </span></span><!--[endif]--><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS"; mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE">Whether the Statement of Facts Establishing the Cause of Action <br> (Statement of Facts) and other documents filed by claimant in this <br> action are properly signed, filed and served without the Bar- <br> approved seals and stamps. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Style" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:4.0pt; font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE"> </span></p> <p class="Style" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS"; mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE">In arguing the issues relates to the first two grounds of this objection. Counsel argued on the premise that a suit is filed in Court if and only if a reasonable cause <br> of action arises. The Supreme Court defined ‘a reasonable cause of <br> action’ In <b><i>Rinco Const. Co. </i></b></span><b><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-bidi-font-family:Arial;mso-font-width: 85%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE">vs. </span></b><b><i><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS"; mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE">Veepee Ind. Ltd. (2005) </span></i></b><b><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS"; mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE">9 <i>NWLR (Pt.929), <br> (2005) </i>3-4 </span></b><b><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-bidi-font-family:Arial;mso-font-width: 85%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE">S.C </span></b><b><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS"; mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE">1 (P. 14, paras. D-G)</span></b><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language: HE"> thus: <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Style" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:18.5pt;margin-bottom:0in; margin-left:60.7pt;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:justify;text-indent:3.1pt"><i><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language: HE">"For a statement of claim </span></i><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS"; mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE">to <i>disclose a reasonable cause of <br> action, it must set out <b>the legal rights of the plaintiff and the <br> obligations of the defendant. </b>It must then go on </i>to <i>set out the <br> facts constituting infraction of the plaintiffs legal right or <br> failure of the defendant </i>to <i>fulfill his obligation in such a way that <br> if there is no proper defence, the plaintiff will succeed in the <br> relief or remedy he seeks. The word "reasonable" means fair, <br> proper, just, moderate, suitable under the circumstances."<o:p></o:p></i></span></p> <p class="Style" style="text-align:justify;text-indent:.5in;tab-stops:4.8pt 32.9pt"><i><span style="font-size:4.0pt;font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-ansi-language:EN-US; mso-bidi-language:HE"> </span></i></p> <p class="Style" style="text-align:justify;tab-stops:4.8pt 32.9pt"><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language: HE">Counsel submitted that the Claimant/Respondent failed to show where Applicant did anything to warrant its being put through the rigours of a Court trial in this suit. <br> See <b><i>Thomas vs. Olufosoye </i>(1986) 1 <i>NWLR (Pt.18) </i>669 <i>Pp. </i>28-29, <i>paras. G</i></b><i>- <b>A</b>. </i>Also<i>, </i>the Claimant<i>/</i>Respondent has not raised any case against applicant irrespective of what the said applicant replied (or even failed to reply) because <br> the Respondent (as Claimant) must win on the strength of his own case and <br> not on the weakness of the defence. <i>See <b>Anyanru vs. Mandilas Ltd (2007) <br> 147 LRCN 1036 @1040 EE </b></i></span><b><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-bidi-font-family:Arial;mso-font-width: 105%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE">& </span></b><b><i><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS"; mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE">1049A. </span></i></b><b><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS"; mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE">In <i>Ogundepo vs. Olumesan (2011) <br> LPELR-SC. 195/2004</i></span></b><i><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS"; mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE">, </span></i><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language: HE">Fabiyi, JSC held at 19 - 20: <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Style" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:20.85pt;margin-bottom:0in; margin-left:30.0pt;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:justify"><i><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language: HE">“The plaintiff needed to succeed on the strength of his own case <br> and not rely on the weakness of the defence, if any. See: <b>Motunwase vs. Sorungbe </b></span></i><b><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-font-width:107%; mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE">(1988) 4 </span></b><b><i><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS"; mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE">NWLR (Pt. </span></i></b><b><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS"; mso-font-width:107%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE">92) </span></b><b><i><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS"; mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE">90 at 101." </span></i></b><i><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language: HE"><o:p></o:p></span></i></p> <p class="Style" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS"; mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE;mso-bidi-font-style:italic">Counsel stated that </span><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-ansi-language: EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE">by the dictum of the Supreme Court above, the applicant is not even bound to prove anything until the respondent has first discharged his <i>onus. </i>In a situation such as we have now, the Court ought to dismiss the case. See <br> <b><i>Nigerian Bottling Company Plc. vs. Mr. Edwin Ezeifo (2001) </i>12 <i>NWLR <br> (Pt. </i>726) 11 <i>(Pp. </i>28-29, <i>paras. G-A):</i></b><i> <b><o:p></o:p></b></i></span></p> <p class="Style" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:1.4pt;margin-bottom:0in; margin-left:25.7pt;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:justify;tab-stops:25.7pt"><i><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language: HE">Where a statement of claim discloses no cause of action and the <br> court is satisfied that no amendment however ingenious, will <br> cure the defect, the statement of claim will be struck out and the <br> action dismissed; and also where no question as to the civil <br> rights and obligations of the plain tiff is raised in the statement of <br> claim for determination, the statement of claim will be struck out <br> and the action dismissed, [Thomas v. Olufosoye </span></i><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-font-width:107%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US; mso-bidi-language:HE">(1986) 1 </span><i><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS"; mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE">NWLR <br> (Pt.18) </span></i><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-font-width: 107%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE">669 </span><i><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language: HE">referred to.]</span></i><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS"; mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE"> <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Style" style="margin-right:.25pt;text-align:justify;tab-stops:0in 4.05pt"><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language: HE">Counsel submitted that when he was hurt by armed robbers, Applicant's Aba branch took him to a local hospital for first aid. Thereafter, he was taken to other sophisticated hospitals in Kaduna, Abuja and Lagos by the Applicant. <b>See <br> paragraphs 17, 18, 19, 24, 26, 30 and 33 of the Statement of Facts</b>. Also, the issue of compensation cannot come to play here because the Respondent <br> admitted that C </span><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-bidi-font-family: Arial;mso-font-width:111%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE">& </span><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language: HE">M Exchange Ltd and Workforce Management Centre Ltd <br> were his employers (at each point in time) and that the Applicant's branches <br> are only his places of posting. See paragraphs 3, 31, 32 and 33 of the Statement of Facts. Even where compensation comes to play, the Applicant <br> has no liability to him since the Applicant is not his employer. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Style" style="margin-right:.25pt;text-align:justify;tab-stops:4.05pt"><span style="font-size:4.0pt;font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-ansi-language:EN-US; mso-bidi-language:HE"> </span></p> <p class="Style" style="margin-right:.25pt;text-align:justify;tab-stops:4.05pt"><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language: HE">It is Counsel further submission that it is clear that this suit is premature in that no dispute has yet been disclosed between parties. No demand has been <br> made by Respondent to the Applicant yet, he is still working in Applicant's <br> bank and nobody has deprived him of his entitlements. <b>See <br> paragraphs 3 and 4 of the affidavit in support. In, <i>CBN vs. Dinneh (2005) <br> LPELR-11349 (CA) </i>@ Pg 24, paras. C-D</b>, the Court of Appeal held: <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Style" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:18.25pt;margin-bottom:0in; margin-left:67.15pt;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:justify"><b><i><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS"; mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE">"A cause of action accrues when a breach of a person's legal <br> right occurs and not when damages are suffered. See USA PIc. v. </span></i></b><b><i><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS"; mso-bidi-font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE">Abdullahi </span></i></b><b><i><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language: HE">(2003) </span></i></b><b><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-font-width:109%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US; mso-bidi-language:HE">3 </span></b><b><i><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language: HE">NWLR (Pt. 807) </span></i></b><b><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-font-width:109%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US; mso-bidi-language:HE">359, </span></b><b><i><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language: HE">See. </span></i></b><b><i><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-bidi-font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language: EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE">Adimora </span></i></b><b><i><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-ansi-language:EN-US; mso-bidi-language:HE">v. Ajufo </span></i></b><b><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-font-width:109%; mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE">(1988) 3 </span></b><b><i><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS"; mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE">NWLR (Pt. 80) </span></i></b><b><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS"; mso-font-width:109%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE">1." <o:p></o:p></span></b></p> <p class="Style" style="margin-right:.45pt;text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language: HE">Counsel stated that merely having health issues is not enough. If the Respondent <br> is not able to convince the Court as to 'when' his right was breached by <br> the Applicant, then the suit should be dismissed. It is Counsel respectful view that the Respondent has not shown it, so the suit ought to be dismissed. Counsel consequently urged the Court to hold that Respondent has not disclosed any cause of action against Applicant and dismiss this suit. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Style" style="margin-right:.45pt;text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:4.0pt;font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-ansi-language:EN-US; mso-bidi-language:HE"> </span></p> <p class="Style" style="margin-right:.45pt;text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language: HE">Counsel also argued that another way of viewing this issue is that since Respondent relies on a contractual relationship between <b>him and Applicant </b>(not between him and C & M/Workforce), he is expected to plead and exhibit the contract documents. Failure to do this is fatal. <b>See <i>Nigeria Airways Ltd vs. F. </i>O. <i>Lapite (1990) </i>7 <i>NWLR. (Pt. </i>163) 392; <i>(1990) LPELR-SC.209/1988 </i>and <br> <i>Shell B- P Petroleum vs. Onasanya </i>(1976) 1 <i>All N.L.R. (Pt. </i>1) 425. <o:p></o:p></b></span></p> <p class="Style" style="margin-right:1.45pt;text-align:justify;tab-stops:30.2pt"><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language: HE">Counsel urged the court to resolve this issue in the negative and dismiss this suit. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Style" style="margin-right:1.45pt;text-align:justify;tab-stops:30.2pt"><span style="font-size:4.0pt;font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-ansi-language:EN-US; mso-bidi-language:HE"> </span></p> <p class="Style" style="margin-right:1.45pt;text-align:justify;tab-stops:30.2pt"><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language: HE">In arguing the second issue Counsel submitted that by the provision of <i>Order </i>3(4)(1) <i>of the Rules of this Honourable Court, </i>for a suit to be competent, it must be accompanied by a valid Statement of Facts Establishing the Cause of Action. The penalty for failure to comply with this simple directive is that the suit is not competent and ought not to have been accepted for filing <i>ab initio. </i><b>See <i>Order 3 (7).</i></b><i> </i><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Style" style="margin-right:.25pt;text-align:justify;tab-stops:4.05pt"><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language: HE">It is the argument of Applicant that the Statement of Facts Establishing the <br> Cause of Action and the Written Statement on Oath filed by Claimant/Respondent, <b>being the sole witness, </b>are invalid in that they <br> have no Bar-approved stamp and seal, and by the provision of the law, any document or process <b>signed or filed </b>by a legal practitioner must have the stamp and seal approved by the Nigerian Bar Association. <b><i>Rule 10 of the Rules of Professional Conduct for Legal Practitioners, </i>2007,</b> provides as follows: <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Style" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:27.35pt;margin-bottom:0in; margin-left:80.65pt;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:justify;text-indent:-.25in; mso-list:l0 level1 lfo4;tab-stops:63.35pt 98.65pt"><!--[if !supportLists]--><i><span style="font-size:13.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Comic Sans MS"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-bidi-font-family:"Comic Sans MS"; mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE;mso-bidi-font-weight:bold">(1)<span style="font-style: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span></i><!--[endif]--><i><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language: HE">A lawyer acting in his capacity as a legal practitioner, legal officer or adviser of any Government department or <br> ministry or any corporation, <b>shall not sign </b></span></i><b><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language: HE">or <i>file </i>a <br> <i>legal document unless there </i>is <i>affixed on any such <br> document </i>a <i>seal and stamp approved by the <br> Nigerian Bar Association. <o:p></o:p></i></span></b></p> <p class="Style" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:26.85pt;margin-bottom:0in; margin-left:80.65pt;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:justify;text-indent:-.25in; mso-list:l0 level1 lfo4;tab-stops:62.65pt 99.1pt"><!--[if !supportLists]--><i><span style="font-size:13.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Comic Sans MS"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-bidi-font-family:"Comic Sans MS"; mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE">(2)<span style="font-style: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span></i><!--[endif]--><i><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language: HE">For the purpose of this rule, </span></i><i><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS"; mso-bidi-font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE">"legal </span></i><i><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-ansi-language:EN-US; mso-bidi-language:HE">documents" shall <br> include pleadings, <b>affidavits, depositions, </b>applications, <br> instruments, agreements, deeds, letters, memoranda, <br> reports, legal opinions or any similar documents. <o:p></o:p></span></i></p> <p class="Style" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:26.85pt;margin-bottom:0in; margin-left:80.65pt;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:justify;text-indent:-.25in; mso-list:l0 level1 lfo4;tab-stops:63.35pt 98.65pt"><!--[if !supportLists]--><i><span style="font-size:13.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Comic Sans MS"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-bidi-font-family:"Comic Sans MS"; mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE">(3)<span style="font-style: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-family: "Times New Roman";"> </span></span></i><!--[endif]--><i><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language: HE">If, without complying with the requirements of this rule, <br> a lawyer signs or files any legal documents as defined in <br> sub-rule </span></i><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-ansi-language: EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE">(2) <i>of this rule, and in any of the capacities <br> mentioned in sub-rule </i>(1), <i>the document </i></span><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-bidi-font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language: EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE">so </span><i><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS"; mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE">signed or <br> filed shall be deemed not to have been properly signed or <br> filed. <o:p></o:p></span></i></p> <p class="Style" style="margin-right:26.85pt;text-align:justify;tab-stops:63.35pt 98.65pt"><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language: HE">He further argued that Counsel for the Claimant/Respondent filed this <br> suit on 6/6/16 without appending his stamp and Seal on the Statement <br> of Facts Establishing the Cause of Action and the sole witness' Written Statement and deposition filed in this suit are improperly signed and filed therefore ought to be discountenanced. See <i>Paragraph 10(3) of the RPC. </i></span><i><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS"; mso-bidi-font-family:Arial;mso-font-width:106%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US; mso-bidi-language:HE"> <o:p></o:p></span></i></p> <p class="Style" style="margin-right:26.85pt;text-align:justify;tab-stops:63.35pt 98.65pt"><span style="font-size:4.0pt;font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-ansi-language:EN-US; mso-bidi-language:HE"> </span></p> <p class="Style" style="margin-right:26.85pt;text-align:justify;tab-stops:63.35pt 98.65pt"><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language: HE">He also argued that the Court of Appeal had earlier been called upon to rule on the attitude of legal practitioners who do not obey the directives of the Bar Association. The said Court found that it is the sacred position of the law that a legal practitioner is bound by the directive of the Bar Association. <b>See <i>Chinwo vs. Owhonda (2008) </i>3 <i>NWLR (Pt. 1074) at P.358</i></b><i>, <b>General Bello </b></i></span><b><i><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-bidi-font-family:Arial;mso-font-width: 107%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE">Sorkin </span></i></b><b><i><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS"; mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE">Yaki vs. Senator Abubakar Atiku Bagudu (2015) </span></i></b><b><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-font-width:112%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US; mso-bidi-language:HE">249 </span></b><b><i><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language: HE">LRCN </span></i></b><b><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-font-width:112%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US; mso-bidi-language:HE">1, </span></b><i><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS"; mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE">the Supreme Court of Nigeria held that a process filed without the Bar seal is improperly signed and filed. This finally settles the issue. The Court, as per Odili, JSC, specifically held: <o:p></o:p></span></i></p> <p class="Style" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:23.0pt;margin-bottom:0in; margin-left:64.05pt;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:justify"><i><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language: HE">"Therefore any non-compliance with the Rule 10(2) of RPC, with the circular of the Chief justice of Nigeria as a reiteration, is <br> visited with the sanction that <b>the process is without <br> competence. </b>It cannot be excused ... /I <o:p></o:p></span></i></p> <p class="Style" style="margin-right:2.4pt;text-align:justify;tab-stops:.7pt 36.95pt"><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language: HE;mso-bidi-font-style:italic">Counsel submitted that<i> </i></span><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language: HE">no amount of a regularising Order can save the situation as no application can be brought now to regularise it because the failure relates to a document that is attached to an originating process. In <b><i>Alhaji Fatai Ayodele Alawiye vs. Adetokunbo Ogunsanya (2012) LPELR- 19661 (SC),</i></b><i> </i><b>the Supreme Court held that suits not initiated by due process of law are nullities. </b>In <b><i>Odejayi vs. Henley Industries Limited (2013) LPELR-20368(CA) P. </i>27</b>, the Court of Appeal held: <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Style" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:1.2pt;margin-bottom:0in; margin-left:36.95pt;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:justify;text-indent:-36.95pt; tab-stops:.2pt 35.25pt"><b><i><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS"; mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE"> A defective writ of summons is void ab initio. It is a nullity <br> and cannot be amended. Indeed all proceedings based on it <br> are a nullity. </span></i></b><i><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS"; mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE">On the issue of substantial justice, Tobi j.S.c. in <br> Dada </span></i><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-bidi-font-family: Arial;mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE">v </span><i><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language: HE">Dosunmu [2006] </span></i><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS"; mso-font-width:123%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE">18 </span><i><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language: HE">NWLR (Pt. 1010) observed: "The <br> role of the court is to apply the principles of substantial justice <br> according to law. The principles cannot be applied outside the <br> law or in contradiction of the law. A court of law will not be <br> performing its role as an independent umpire if it bends <br> backward to do justice to one of the parties, at the expense of <br> the other party. <o:p></o:p></span></i></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-bidi-language:HE">It is Counsel contention that the Supreme Court having held that a lawyer must affix the seal, the doctrine of <i>stare decisis </i>demands that all other Courts in the land are bound to follow it. <b>See <i>Ugwuanyi vs. Nicon Insurance Pic (2013) 220 <br> LRCN (Pt. </i>2) @ <i>90]].</i></b><i> </i> Counsel urged the Court to resolve this issue in the negative and set aside the claims of the Respondent. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Style" style="margin-right:.75pt;text-align:justify;tab-stops:32.15pt 65.75pt"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:4.0pt;font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-bidi-language: HE"> </span></p> <p class="Style" style="margin-right:.75pt;text-align:justify;tab-stops:32.15pt 65.75pt"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-bidi-language:HE">In opposing the application, the Claimant on 18/08/2016 filed a 6 - paragraph counter affidavit. In the written address filed alongside, Counsel argued the same issues raised by the Applicant for the Court’s determination. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Style" style="margin-right:.2pt;text-align:justify;tab-stops:0in 65.5pt"><span style="font-size:4.0pt;font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-font-width:111%; mso-ansi-language:EN-US"> </span></p> <p class="Style" style="margin-right:.2pt;text-align:justify;tab-stops:0in 65.5pt"><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-font-width:111%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US">It is Counsel’s submission that the Claimant/Respondent has established a cause of action. Even the Defendant adduced evidence to say they are not liable to Claimant for compensation for injury in work place. Documents adduced by them showed that they entered into C </span><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS"; mso-font-width:89%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US">& </span><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-font-width:111%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US">M Exchange Limited or Messrs Workforce Management Centre in a manner to deny a Nigerian citizen his right to be covered and compensated for injury in workplace under the Workman Compensation Act 2011.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Style" style="margin-right:.2pt;text-align:justify;tab-stops:7.1pt 65.5pt"><span style="font-size:4.0pt;font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-font-width:111%; mso-ansi-language:EN-US"> </span></p> <p class="Style" style="margin-right:.2pt;text-align:justify;tab-stops:7.1pt 65.5pt"><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-font-width:111%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US">Counsel defined the meaning of cause of action - A cause of action is a fact which when proved would entitle a plaintiff to a remedy against a defendant. <b>See the case of BELLO vs. A.G. OYO STATE (1986) 5 NWLR (Pt.45) 828; OSHODOJA </b></span><b><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-font-width:91%;mso-ansi-language: EN-US">vs. </span></b><b><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-font-width:111%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US">AMUDA (1992) 6 NWLR (Pt. 250) 690, </span></b><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS"; mso-font-width:111%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US">and on what documents to examine to ascertain whether or not there is a reasonable cause of action - the court held thus: It is settled law that when an objection is raised that the Statement of Claim does not disclose a reasonable cause of action, it is the Statement of Claim that has to be examined to ascertain whether or not there is a reasonable cause of action.<b> See the following cases; COOKEY vs. FOMBO (2005) 22 NSCQR 411 at P. 422 PARAS D-E; OGBIMI vs. OLOLO (1993) 7 NWLR (Pt.304) 128; DR. IRENE THOMAS vs. OLUFOSOYE (1986) 1 NWLR (Pt.18) 669 at PP.671-672 PARAS G-B. <o:p></o:p></b></span></p> <p class="Style" style="margin-right:1.2pt;text-align:justify;tab-stops:33.4pt"><span style="font-size:4.0pt;font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-font-width:111%; mso-ansi-language:EN-US"> </span></p> <p class="Style" style="margin-right:1.2pt;text-align:justify;tab-stops:33.4pt"><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-font-width:111%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US">Counsel posited a question</span><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-font-width: 114%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US"> whether the Defendant can hide under his agreement with C </span><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-font-width: 87%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US">& </span><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS"; mso-font-width:114%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US">M Exchange Limited to deny liability or obligation under the Employees Compensation Act 2010 is a live issue before this Court. And only after trial would this be resolved. Counsel submitted that it is the duty of the Defendant to show at the trial where the liability for compensation for injury in workplace, which is not a privilege by our laws, but a right to every worker, fell within the Defendant's contract with C </span><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-font-width:87%; mso-ansi-language:EN-US">& </span><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS"; mso-font-width:114%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US">M Exchange Limited. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Style" style="margin-right:.45pt;text-align:justify;tab-stops:0in"><span style="font-size:4.0pt;font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-font-width:114%; mso-ansi-language:EN-US"> </span></p> <p class="Style" style="margin-right:.45pt;text-align:justify;tab-stops:0in"><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-font-width:114%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US">Counsel also pointed out that the Applicant Counsel contradicted himself when he in one breathe argued that Applicant has no liability to Respondent since Applicant is not his employer and in another breathe he argued that Respondent is still working in Applicant's bank <br> and nobody has yet deprived him of his entitlements. The Supreme Court stated in the case of <b>F. R. N. vs. TAWAKLITU (2013) ALLFWLR (PT.695) @331, PARA G RATIO 3</b>: <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Style" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:43.65pt;margin-bottom:0in; margin-left:70.05pt;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:justify"><i><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-ansi-language:EN-US">"That the Supreme </span></i><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-font-width: 114%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US">Court as </span><i><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS"; mso-ansi-language:EN-US">any other </span></i><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS"; mso-font-width:114%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US">court </span><i><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-ansi-language:EN-US">is enjoined </span></i><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-font-width:114%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US">to </span><i><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-ansi-language:EN-US">consider </span></i><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-font-width:114%; mso-ansi-language:EN-US">a </span><i><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS"; mso-ansi-language:EN-US">preliminary objection </span></i><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-font-width:114%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US">on </span><i><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-ansi-language:EN-US">its merits </span></i><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-font-width:114%; mso-ansi-language:EN-US">on </span><i><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS"; mso-ansi-language:EN-US">the available materials placed before it by the parties". <o:p></o:p></span></i></p> <p class="Style" style="margin-right:43.65pt;text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-font-width:114%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US">Relying on the above decided case, Counsel submitted that the Applicant in this suit did not place before this Court, available material to entitle them to the relief sought in this application. </span><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS"; mso-font-width:111%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US">Counsel submitted that where the Defendant/Applicant and C </span><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS"; mso-font-width:106%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US">& </span><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-font-width:111%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US">M Exchange Limited put tax of staff form into perspective, but deliberately omitted to consider the staff entitlements under the </span><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-font-width:114%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US">Employees Compensation Act 2010, it becomes a matter for determination of the Court. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Style" style="text-align:justify;tab-stops:0in"><span style="font-size: 4.0pt;font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-font-width:114%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US"> </span></p> <p class="Style" style="text-align:justify;tab-stops:0in"><span style="font-family: "Comic Sans MS";mso-font-width:114%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US">Moreover, Counsel submitted that all documentation processes of the Claimant/Respondent was done at the Applicant's WAAST Avenue, Ikenegbu Owerri premises and the Respondent was immediately offered a fresh employment letter and was still deployed to WAAST Avenue, Ikenegbu Owerri as Front Desk Teller with a genuine identity card duly issued to him by the Applicant in this suit. <b>See paragraphs 1, 3, 31 of the Respondent's Statement of Facts establishing the Cause of Action</b>, therefore, the submission of the Defendant/Applicant Counsel that relies on their contractual relationship between them and C </span><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-font-width: 106%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US">& </span><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS"; mso-font-width:114%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US">M Exchange Limited to escape liability under the Employees Compensation Act is futile and mere academic to say the least. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Style" style="text-align:justify;tab-stops:0in"><span style="font-size: 4.0pt;font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-font-width:114%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US"> </span></p> <p class="Style" style="text-align:justify;tab-stops:0in"><span style="font-family: "Comic Sans MS";mso-font-width:114%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US">Counsel submitted that the Claimant has in his writ and statement of facts establishing the cause of action, established a valid cause of action to activate the powers and jurisdiction of this Court. He then urged the Court to dismiss the preliminary objection for being frivolous.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Style" style="text-align:justify;tab-stops:0in"><span style="font-family: "Comic Sans MS";mso-font-width:114%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US">Regarding the second issue Counsel stated that the entire gravamen of The Defendant’s Counsel’s submission on issue two is that while the Claimant’s Counsel affixed his seal on the Complaint, none was affixed on the Statement of Facts Establishing the Cause of Action; List of documents to be relied upon at the trial, and list of witnesses to be called. By implication, the Defendant’s Counsel is saying that all documents as required by Order 3 Rule 4 of the National Industrial Court Rules as enumerated above are separate, independent and exists on their own. The question therefore is; whether it is the intention of the law that these set of documents be separate or form the basis for one document within the name of a "Complaint" <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Style" style="margin-right:.25pt;text-align:justify;tab-stops:1.0pt 34.8pt"><span style="font-size:4.0pt;font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-font-width:114%; mso-ansi-language:EN-US"> </span></p> <p class="Style" style="margin-right:.25pt;text-align:justify;tab-stops:1.0pt 34.8pt"><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-font-width:114%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US">Order 3 Rule 4 of the National Industrial Court Rules provides as follows: <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Style" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:.25pt;margin-bottom:0in; margin-left:71.05pt;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-font-width:114%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US">"The complaint shall be accompanied by: <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Style" style="margin-top:.2pt;margin-right:104.15pt;margin-bottom:0in; margin-left:1.75in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:justify;text-indent:-.75in; mso-list:l2 level1 lfo6"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-bidi-font-family:"Comic Sans MS"; mso-font-width:114%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US">(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-family:"Comic Sans MS"; mso-font-width:114%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US">a statement of facts establishing the cause of action;<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Style" style="margin-top:.2pt;margin-right:104.15pt;margin-bottom:0in; margin-left:1.75in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:justify;text-indent:-.75in; mso-list:l2 level1 lfo6"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-bidi-font-family:"Comic Sans MS"; mso-font-width:114%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US">(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-family:"Comic Sans MS"; mso-font-width:114%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US">copies of every document to be relied on at the trial; <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Style" style="margin-top:.2pt;margin-right:104.15pt;margin-bottom:0in; margin-left:1.75in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:justify;text-indent:-.75in; mso-list:l2 level1 lfo6"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-bidi-font-family:"Comic Sans MS"; mso-font-width:114%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US">(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-family:"Comic Sans MS"; mso-font-width:114%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US">list of witnesses to be called. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Style" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS"; mso-font-width:114%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US">Counsel submitted that the word "Shall" makes it mandatory that for there to be a valid complaint, it must be accompanied by the above listed documents. The implication is that there cannot be one without the order.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Style" style="margin-right:1.85pt;text-align:justify;tab-stops:.7pt"><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-font-width:114%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US">It is Counsel’s argument that Rule 10 of the Rules of Professional Conduct 2007 as quoted and relied on by Defendant Counsel stated thus; <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Style" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:1.15pt;margin-bottom:0in; margin-left:70.8pt;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:justify"><b><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS"; mso-font-width:109%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US">"A </span></b><b><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS"; mso-font-width:114%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US">lawyer acting on his capacity as a legal practitioner legal officer or adviser of any government department or ministry or any corporation, <u>shall not sign or file a legal document unless there is affixed on any such document a seal and stamp approved by the Nigerian Bar Association" </u>Underlines mine. <o:p></o:p></span></b></p> <p class="Style" style="margin-right:.65pt;text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-font-width:114%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US">Therefore, Counsel submitted that in the instant case, what was filed is an originating process by way of Complaint. The complaint is accompanied by other documents which were made mandatory by the rules for there to be a valid Complaint. The Complaint was sealed and the Defendant’s Counsel does not oppose this fact. His argument therefore that the accompanied documents did not carry the seal is diversionary, a wild goose chase and a voyage of discovery. This is an invitation this Court must reject. The Courts are here for serious business to determine where there can be remedy for injuries and not for frivolous arguments on schematics.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Style" style="text-align:justify;tab-stops:0in 1.45pt"><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-font-width:114%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US">Counsel further submitted that the whole essence of the affixing Stamp and Seal is to secure compliance that only a legal practitioner who is licensed to practice up to date is allowed to do business in our Courts. The Complaint filed by the Claimant clearly shows that. The excess demand by Defendant Counsel that the Seal must be over- affixed is his own imputation into the Rules. The Complaint is not filed in exclusion of other documents and so cannot be construed to mean different documents.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Style" style="text-align:justify;tab-stops:0in 1.45pt"><span style="font-size:4.0pt;font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-font-width:112%; mso-ansi-language:EN-US"> </span></p> <p class="Style" style="text-align:justify;tab-stops:0in 1.45pt"><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-font-width:112%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US">Finally, Counsel urged the Court to dismiss this preliminary objection as it lacks merit, with cost awarded against Defendant for waste of the Court's judicial time.</span><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-font-width:114%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US"> <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Style" align="center" style="margin-right:.65pt;text-align:center; line-height:14.6pt;mso-line-height-rule:exactly"><b><u><span style="font-size:8.0pt;mso-font-width:114%;mso-ansi-language: EN-US"> </span></u></b></p> <p class="Style" align="center" style="margin-right:.65pt;text-align:center; line-height:14.6pt;mso-line-height-rule:exactly"><b><u>COURT DECISION<o:p></o:p></u></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:4.0pt;font-family: "Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-language:HE"> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-bidi-language:HE">From the prayers sought by the defendant in this application and the submissions of its counsel in the written address, the Defendant’s complaint against this suit is on 3 grounds. The grounds are-<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-indent:-.5in"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-bidi-language:HE">1. <i>The suit is pre-mature, no dispute having been disclosed between parties</i>.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-indent:-.5in"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-bidi-language:HE; mso-bidi-font-style:italic">2. <i>No cause of action has been disclosed against Defendant.</i> <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-indent:-.5in"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-bidi-language:HE; mso-bidi-font-style:italic">3. <i>The Statement of Facts establishing the cause of action and other documents filed by Claimant are improperly signed, filed and served, having not been sealed as provided for by law</i>. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:4.0pt; font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-bidi-language:HE;mso-bidi-font-style:italic"> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-bidi-language:HE;mso-bidi-font-style:italic">I shall </span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Comic Sans MS"; mso-bidi-language:HE">consider each of these identified grounds or prayers in the defendant’s application, taking issues one and two together.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:4.0pt; font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-bidi-language:HE"> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal;mso-layout-grid-align:none;text-autospace:none"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Comic Sans MS"">Cause of action has been defined in the case of <b>S.P.D.C Nig. vs. OKONOEDO (2008) 9 NWLR (Pt.109) 85 @ 117-118, </b>as a factual situation, the existence of which entitles the plaintiff to obtain from the court a remedy against another person or the facts which constitutes the essential ingredients of an enforceable right of claim. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:4.0pt; font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-font-width:111%"> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Comic Sans MS"">To determine whether or not the Claimant has disclosed a cause of action against the Defendant, it is pertinent to answer the question as regards when a cause of action can be said to have been disclosed. The courts have held that in determining whether or not a <span class="apple-style-span"><span style="background:white;mso-bidi-font-weight:bold">cause</span></span><span class="apple-converted-space"> </span><span class="apple-style-span"><span style="background:white;mso-bidi-font-weight:bold">of</span></span><span class="apple-converted-space"> </span><span class="apple-style-span"><span style="background:white;mso-bidi-font-weight:bold">action</span></span><span class="apple-converted-space"> </span><span class="apple-style-span">or a reasonable</span><span class="apple-converted-space"> </span><span class="apple-style-span"><span style="background:white;mso-bidi-font-weight:bold">cause</span></span><span class="apple-converted-space"> </span><span class="apple-style-span"><span style="background:white;mso-bidi-font-weight:bold">of</span></span><span class="apple-converted-space"> </span><span class="apple-style-span"><span style="background:white;mso-bidi-font-weight:bold">action</span></span> has been disclosed, <span class="apple-style-span">the court must restrict itself to the facts as pleaded in the Statement</span><span class="apple-converted-space"> </span><span class="apple-style-span"><span style="background:white;mso-bidi-font-weight:bold">of</span></span><span class="apple-converted-space"> </span><span class="apple-style-span">Claim without resort to any extraneous facts. It is now settled law</span> that once a Statement of Claim raises some issues of law or fact calling for determination by the court, the mere fact that the case is weak and not likely to succeed is not a ground for holding that no cause of action has been disclosed.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:4.0pt; font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-font-width:111%"> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-font-width:111%">A cause of action is a fact which when proved would entitle a plaintiff to a remedy against a defendant. <b>See the case of BELLO vs. A.G. OYO STATE (1986) 5 NWLR (Pt.45) 828; OSHODOJA </b></span><b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-font-width: 91%">vs. </span></b><b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-font-width:111%">AMUDA (1992) 6 NWLR (Pt. 250) 690, </span></b><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-font-width:111%">and on what documents to examine to ascertain whether or not there is a reasonable cause of action - the court held thus: It is settled law that when an objection is raised that the Statement of Claim does not disclose a reasonable cause of action, it is the Statement of Claim that has to be examined to ascertain whether or not there is a reasonable cause of action.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:4.0pt; font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-font-width:111%"> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-font-width:111%">The facts of the Claimant’s case as disclosed in the statement of facts are that he is an employee of the Defendant, and he was employed for the Defendant by C & M Exchange Limited, an agent of the Defendant, and a recruiting consulting firm, and thereafter deployed to the Defendant’s Owerri Branch. According to the Claimant, he never worked at C & M Exchange Limited, and his salaries came from the Defendant and not C & M Limited. The claim of the Claimant is for damages arising from injury sustained at the workplace. In paragraph 40 of the Statement of Facts, the Claimant averred that he was working for the Defendant when the incident giving rise to the claims in this suit happened. Averments in Paragraphs 6 and 7 of the Statement of Defence also point to the fact of a working relationship between the Claimant and the Defendant. Without wasting further time on this point, it is my view that a cause of action has been disclosed against the Defendant. </span><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Comic Sans MS"">I hold that the Claimant has disclosed a sufficient cause of action against the Defendant. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:4.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";mso-bidi-language:HE"> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-font-width:111%">I have noted however that both parties have in their pleadings, made mention of two recruiting firms to wit C & M Exchange Limited and Workforce Management Center. Counsel for the Defendant/Applicant has relied heavily on this point to argue that the Claimant was not employed by the Defendant but by C & M Exchange Limited and Workforce Management Center. This assertion of counsel alone does not remove the cause of action against the Defendant. I have gone further to examine the pleadings of the parties. In paragraph 31 of the Statement of Facts, the Claimant averred that at some point, the recruiting consulting firm of C & M Exchange Ltd was fired by the Defendant and replaced by Workforce Management Center who subsequently handled the staff of the Defendant who were formerly handled by C & M Exchange Ltd. In Paragraph 32, it was averred that the Claimant updated his records accordingly, in line with the transition from C & M Exchange Ltd to Workforce Management Center. The Defendant has corroborated this fact in Paragraph 3 of the Statement of Defence wherein the names of the two consulting firms were mentioned as having been the Claimant’s employers at one point or the other. Infact the Defendant has gone ahead to plead and frontload the service level agreement between the Defendant and Workforce Management Center Ltd and a labour service agreement between the Defendant and C & M Exchange Ltd. While these facts do not remove a cause of action from the Defendant, the pleadings and documents have called for a determination of the question as to who are the necessary parties to the action. Both parties have repeatedly mentioned the role of C & M Exchange Ltd and Workforce Management Center Ltd in the employment of the Claimant. </span><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Comic Sans MS"">They are therefore entitled to be heard on those averments affecting them. C & M Exchange Ltd and Workforce Management Center Ltd no doubt are necessary parties who ought to be made a parties to this suit, peradventure the court makes an order affecting either of them. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:4.0pt;font-family: "Comic Sans MS""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Comic Sans MS"">It is trite that the court has an inherent jurisdiction to suo motu order the joinder of any party to a suit. See <b>GREEN vs. GREEN (2001) FWLR (Pt. 76) 795; NNORODIM vs. EZEANI (2001) FWLR (Pt. 40) 1696 at 1699. </b>Consequently, </span><b><u><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:13.0pt; font-family:"Comic Sans MS"">I hereby order the joinder of C & M Exchange Ltd and Workforce Management Center Ltd to this suit as the 2<sup>nd</sup> and 3<sup>rd</sup> Defendants. This order and the originating processes are to be served on C & M Exchange Ltd. and Workforce Management Center Ltd. The 1<sup>st</sup> Defendant is hereby ordered to provide the addresses for service on the 2<sup>nd</sup> and 3<sup>rd</sup> Defendants.</span></u></b><b><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:13.0pt; font-family:"Comic Sans MS""> The court will not hesitate to revoke the order hereby made if it finds in the long run that it was wrongly made.</span></b><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Comic Sans MS""><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:4.0pt;font-family: "Comic Sans MS""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-bidi-language:HE;mso-bidi-font-style:italic">Now to the 3<sup>rd</sup> issue as to the argument of counsel for the applicant that the Statement of Facts establishing the cause of action and other documents filed by Claimant are improperly signed, filed and served, having not been sealed as provided for by law. </span><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE">It is the argument of Counsel for the Defendant/Applicant that the Statement of Facts Establishing the Cause of Action and the Written Statement on Oath filed by the Claimant <b>being the sole witness, </b>are invalid, in that they have no Bar-approved stamp and seal, and by the provision of the law, any document or process <b>signed or filed </b>by a legal practitioner must have the stamp and seal approved by the Nigerian Bar Association.</span><i><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-bidi-language:HE"><o:p></o:p></span></i></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><i><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:4.0pt; font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-bidi-language:HE"> </span></i></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-bidi-language:HE;mso-bidi-font-style:italic">I have examined the processes filed by the Claimant in this suit and I find that the NBA stamp of the counsel who issued the complaint was duly affixed to the Complaint, even though the said stamp was not affixed on the accompanying processes. It was on this ground the Defendant has urged this court to strike out the suit for being incompetent. The argument of the Defendant’s counsel on this point, though brilliant, is of no moment in this instance. The requirement for sealing of court processes has not taken away counsel’s right to practice as a Barrister and Solicitor of the Supreme Court of Nigeria. While the right to practice is sacrosanct, there are laws or regulations regulating that right. These include the Legal Practitioners Act and the Rules of Professional Conduct for Legal Practitioners, </span><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-font-width:107%;mso-bidi-language:HE">2007. </span><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-bidi-language: HE;mso-bidi-font-style:italic">The RPC is made pursuant to the Legal Practitioners Act 2004. It makes the RPC a subsidiary legislation and imbues it with a force of law. <i><o:p></o:p></i></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Comic Sans MS"; mso-bidi-language:HE;mso-bidi-font-style:italic">Rule 10 of the RPC </span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-font-width:107%; mso-bidi-language:HE">provides as follows: <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.25in"><b><i><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-bidi-language:HE">(1) A lawyer acting in his capacity as a legal practitioner, legal officer or adviser of any Government department or ministry or any corporation, shall not sign </span></i></b><b><i><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family: "Comic Sans MS";mso-font-width:118%;mso-bidi-language:HE">or </span></i></b><b><i><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-font-width:107%;mso-bidi-language:HE">file a legal document unless there </span></i></b><b><i><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family: "Comic Sans MS";mso-font-width:113%;mso-bidi-language:HE">is </span></i></b><b><i><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-font-width:107%;mso-bidi-language:HE">affixed on any such document a seal and stamp approved by the Nigerian Bar Association. <o:p></o:p></span></i></b></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.25in"><b><i><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-bidi-language:HE">(2) For the purpose of this rule, "legal documents" shall include pleadings, affidavits, depositions, applications, instruments, agreements, deeds, letters, memoranda, reports, legal opinions or any similar documents. <o:p></o:p></span></i></b></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.25in"><b><i><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-bidi-language:HE">(3) If, without complying with the requirements of this rule, a lawyer sings or files any legal documents as defined in sub- rule </span></i></b><b><i><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-font-width:113%; mso-bidi-language:HE">(2) </span></i></b><b><i><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-bidi-language:HE">of this rule, and in any of the capacities mentioned in sub-rule </span></i></b><b><i><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-font-width:107%; mso-bidi-language:HE">(1), </span></i></b><b><i><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-bidi-language:HE">the document so signed or filed shall be deemed not to have been properly signed or filed.<o:p></o:p></span></i></b></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-bidi-language:HE;mso-bidi-font-style:italic">This rule requires that every process filed by counsel in court must be sealed with the NBA Stamp. The effect of failure to affix the stamp is that the process will be deemed improperly signed or filed. The Supreme Court has given judicial thrust to the provision of Rules 10 of RPC in a decision </span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Comic Sans MS"">delivered on 27<sup>th</sup> October 2015 in <b>Appeal No: SC/722/15 </b>between <b>ALL PROGRESSIVES CONGRESS vs. GENERAL BELLO SARKIN YAKI</b></span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Comic Sans MS"; mso-bidi-language:HE;mso-bidi-font-style:italic">. The Supreme Court stated in that case that such a document filed without the seal, even though signed and filed is not proper in law for the reason that the condition precedent for its proper signing and filing has not been met. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:4.0pt; font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-bidi-language:HE;mso-bidi-font-style:italic"> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-bidi-language:HE;mso-bidi-font-style:italic">The RPC was made in February 2007</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family: "Comic Sans MS";mso-font-width:106%;mso-bidi-language:HE"> but the Nigerian Bar Association made the use of the seal/stamp compulsory as </span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-bidi-language:HE; mso-bidi-font-style:italic">from 1<sup>st</sup> April 2015. The Claimant filed this suit on 6<sup>th</sup> June 2016. I recall however the directive of the Chief Justice of Nigeria to all the Heads of Court,</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Comic Sans MS""> contained in his Lordship’s letter dated 12<sup>th</sup> May 2015, to</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-bidi-language:HE; mso-bidi-font-style:italic"> enforce and</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Comic Sans MS""> implement the NBA stamp policy starting from 1<sup>st</sup> June 2015</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Comic Sans MS"; mso-bidi-language:HE;mso-bidi-font-style:italic">. </span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Comic Sans MS"">This suit was filed after the directive was handed down. Therefore, it is not exempted from full compliance with the stamp and seal policy/rule.</span><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-bidi-language:HE;mso-bidi-font-style:italic"><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:4.0pt; font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-bidi-language:HE;mso-bidi-font-style:italic"> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Comic Sans MS"">Before I conclude, let me comment on the argument of the Defendant’s counsel that non-sealing or stamping of the processes render them incompetent and the suit liable to be struck out. The Supreme Court, in the <b>ALL PROGRESSIVES CONGRESS vs. GENERAL BELLO SARKIN YAKI </b>case has explained the effect of not affixing the NBA stamp to a court process. The unanimous view of their Lordships in the Supreme Court is that failure to affix a stamp to court processes in contravention of Rule 10 RPC 2007 only renders the process irregular or voidable. It was also held that the irregularity can be cured by simply affixing the stamp. Nwali Ngwuta JSC, who read the lead judgment, expressed the view that such a process even though signed and filed is not null and void or incompetent. He further said: </span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family: "Comic Sans MS";mso-bidi-language:HE;mso-bidi-font-style:italic"><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify"><b><i><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Comic Sans MS"">“In such a case, the filing of the process can be regularized by extension of time and deeming order. In the case at hand, the process filed in breach of Rule 10 (1) of the Rules of Professional Conduct for Legal Practitioners 2007 can be saved and it’s signing and filing regularized by affixing the approved seal and stamp on it. It is a legal document improperly filed and the affixing of the stamp and seal would make the filing proper in law.”<o:p></o:p></span></i></b></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify;tab-stops:399.0pt"><span style="font-size:4.0pt;font-family:"Comic Sans MS""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify;tab-stops:399.0pt"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Comic Sans MS"">Therefore, in my view, the Claimant’s processes are not incompetent as argued by the Defendant’s counsel, especially as the lawyer’s stamp is duly affixed on the Complaint which is the main originating process. Even though the other processes requires the lawyer’s stamp, I shall consider them as merely only irregular or voidable. They can be validated or regularized by affixing the stamp. I shall allow the Claimant the opportunity to validate the processes in the interest of justice. Accordingly, the Claimant’s counsel is given on or before the return date of this matter to affix to the relevant processes, that is the copies of this court and that of the Defendant, the NBA stamp or seal of the counsel. Failure to comply will make this court to revisit the issue on the return date.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify;tab-stops:399.0pt"><span style="font-size:4.0pt;font-family:"Comic Sans MS""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify;tab-stops:399.0pt"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Comic Sans MS"">For the avoidance of doubt, it is ordered as follows:<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:4.0pt; font-family:"Comic Sans MS""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.25in;mso-list:l3 level1 lfo5"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-size: 12.0pt;font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-fareast-font-family:"Comic Sans MS"; mso-bidi-font-family:"Comic Sans 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:"Comic Sans MS"">The Defendant’s application for striking out of this suit is hereby refused. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.25in;mso-list:l3 level1 lfo5"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-size: 12.0pt;font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-fareast-font-family:"Comic Sans MS"; mso-bidi-font-family:"Comic Sans 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:"Comic Sans MS"">I hereby order the joinder of C & M Exchange Ltd and Workforce Management Center Ltd to this suit as the 2<sup>nd</sup> and 3<sup>rd</sup> Defendants. This order and the originating processes are to be served on C & M Exchange Ltd. and Workforce Management Center Ltd. The 1<sup>st</sup> Defendant is hereby ordered to provide the addresses for service on the 2<sup>nd</sup> and 3<sup>rd</sup> Defendants. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.25in;mso-list:l3 level1 lfo5"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-size: 12.0pt;font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-fareast-font-family:"Comic Sans MS"; mso-bidi-font-family:"Comic Sans 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:"Comic Sans MS"">Leave is granted to the Claimant’s counsel to re-file his processes to reflect the order of joinder hereby made. This shall be without prejudice to the date of commencement of action. All subsequent processes in this suit shall reflect this joinder.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:.5in;text-align:justify;text-indent: -.25in;mso-list:l3 level1 lfo5"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-size: 12.0pt;font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-fareast-font-family:"Comic Sans MS"; mso-bidi-font-family:"Comic Sans 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:"Comic Sans MS"">Leave is granted to the Claimant’s counsel to validate his processes by affixing the NBA stamp and seal of the relevant processes (that is the copies of this court and that of the Defendants) on or before the return date of matter.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Comic Sans MS"">No order as to cost.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing"><span style="font-size:4.0pt;font-family:"Comic Sans MS""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Comic Sans MS"">Ruling is entered accordingly.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Comic Sans MS""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Comic Sans MS""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing"><b><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Comic Sans MS"">Hon. Justice O. Y. Anuwe<o:p></o:p></span></b></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Comic Sans MS"">Judge<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Style" style="margin-right:.65pt;line-height:14.6pt;mso-line-height-rule: exactly"><b><u><span style="font-family: "Comic Sans MS";mso-font-width:114%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US"> </span></u></b></p>