Download PDF
<p class="Style" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:-.1in;margin-bottom:0in; margin-left:-.1in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:justify;line-height:13.4pt; mso-line-height-rule:exactly"><b><u><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-font-width:110%; mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE">Representation:<o:p></o:p></span></u></b></p> <p class="Style" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:-.1in;margin-bottom:0in; margin-left:-.1in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:justify;line-height:13.4pt; mso-line-height-rule:exactly"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Comic Sans MS"; mso-font-width:110%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE">Gamaliel Okoh for the Defendant/Applicant<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Style" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:-.1in;margin-bottom:0in; margin-left:-.1in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:justify;line-height:13.4pt; mso-line-height-rule:exactly"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Comic Sans MS"; mso-font-width:110%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE">No legal representation for the Claimant/Respondent</span><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS"; mso-font-width:110%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE"><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Style" align="center" style="margin-top:11.75pt;margin-right:53.0pt; margin-bottom:0in;margin-left:38.4pt;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:center; text-indent:-38.4pt;line-height:14.6pt;mso-line-height-rule:exactly;tab-stops: 35.55pt"><b> </b><b><u><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-font-width:110%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US; mso-bidi-language:HE">RULING/JUDGMENT<o:p></o:p></span></u></b></p> <p class="Style" style="text-align:justify;tab-stops:.5pt"><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language: HE">The Claimant instituted this suit against the Defendant herein on the 1<sup>st</sup> day of April 2015 vide a Complaint, wherein the Claimant claimed against the Defendant as follows:<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Style" style="margin-left:.75in;text-align:justify;text-indent:-.5in; mso-list:l0 level1 lfo2;tab-stops:.5pt"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="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">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-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE">The sum representing the Defendant’s contribution to the pension scheme as applicable in the Laws of Nigeria or in the alternative the sum due to be contributed by the Defendants as its contribution on the legally regulated pension scheme per month at the same interest regime as in relief (i) above.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Style" style="margin-left:.75in;text-align:justify;text-indent:-.5in; mso-list:l0 level1 lfo2;tab-stops:.5pt"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="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">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-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE">The sum of <s>N</s>30,000,000.00 (Thirty Million Naira) only, being the projected medical cost for the Claimant’s loss of hearing and all his entitlements and emoluments accruable to the Claimant from the Defendant as a result of the Claimant’s many years of meritorious services to the Defendant. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Style" style="margin-left:.75in;text-align:justify;text-indent:-.5in; mso-list:l0 level1 lfo2;tab-stops:.5pt"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="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">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-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE">The sum of <s>N</s>20,000,000.00 (Twenty Million Naira) only, being the general damages suffered by the Claimant as a result of the Defendant’s illegal termination of their employment.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Style" style="text-align:justify;tab-stops:.5pt"><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;tab-stops:.5pt"><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language: HE">On the 20<sup>th</sup> day of October 2015, the Defendant filed the present application brought pursuant to Section 6(6) of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended), Sections 7 (1)(a) & 8(1) &(2) of the Limitation Act 1966, Order 11 Rule 1 of the National Industrial Court Rules 2007 and under the inherent jurisdiction of the Honourable Court seeking for two (2) major reliefs as endorsed thereon; to wit:<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Style" style="text-align:justify;tab-stops:.5pt"><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language: HE"> <i>a). An Order of this Honourable Court that the Honourable <br> Court lacks jurisdiction to hear and determine the suit for being time/Statute barred. <o:p></o:p></i></span></p> <p class="Style" style="text-align:justify;tab-stops:.5pt"><i><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-font-width:116%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US; mso-bidi-language:HE">b). An Order of this Honourable Court dismissing this suit for being time/Statute barred; AND for such further and/or other orders as this Honourable Court may deem fit to make in the circumstances.<o:p></o:p></span></i></p> <p class="Style" style="text-align:justify;tab-stops:.5pt"><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-font-width:116%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US; mso-bidi-language:HE;mso-bidi-font-style:italic">The grounds upon which this application is brought are as follows:<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Style" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:53.0pt;margin-bottom:0in; margin-left:.75in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:justify;text-indent:-.5in; mso-list:l1 level1 lfo1;tab-stops:.5pt"><!--[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:116%;mso-ansi-language: EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE;mso-bidi-font-style:italic">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:116%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE;mso-bidi-font-style: italic">In the interest of justice<i><o:p></o:p></i></span></p> <p class="Style" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:53.0pt;margin-bottom:0in; margin-left:.75in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:justify;text-indent:-.5in; mso-list:l1 level1 lfo1;tab-stops:.5pt"><!--[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:116%;mso-ansi-language: EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE;mso-bidi-font-style:italic">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:116%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE;mso-bidi-font-style: italic">By paragraph 9 of the statement of facts of the Claimant and the attached medical report, the Claimant stated that said medical report dated 9<sup>th</sup> October 2007 which clearly explains the state of the Claimant’s hearing condition, when the Defendant unilaterally and callously terminated his appointment is attached..” and on that date the cause of action arose.<i><o:p></o:p></i></span></p> <p class="Style" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:53.0pt;margin-bottom:0in; margin-left:.75in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:justify;text-indent:-.5in; mso-list:l1 level1 lfo1;tab-stops:.5pt"><!--[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:116%;mso-ansi-language: EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE;mso-bidi-font-style:italic">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:116%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE;mso-bidi-font-style: italic">The alleged contract of employment is a simple contract and the limitation period applicable for instituting this suit is three(3) years or at most six(6) years.<i><o:p></o:p></i></span></p> <p class="Style" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:53.0pt;margin-bottom:0in; margin-left:.75in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:justify;text-indent:-.5in; mso-list:l1 level1 lfo1;tab-stops:.5pt"><!--[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:116%;mso-ansi-language: EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE;mso-bidi-font-style:italic">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-family:"Comic Sans MS"; mso-font-width:116%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE;mso-bidi-font-style: italic">The suit is statute barred.<i> <o:p></o:p></i></span></p> <p class="Style" style="text-align:justify;tab-stops:1.2pt 38.65pt"><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language: HE">The application is supported by a 4 paragraph affidavit deposed to by Matthew Adeniyi, a Litigation Clerk in the Defendant/Applicant's Solicitors' Law Firm and a written address wherein the Defendant Counsel raised a lone issue for Court determination:<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><i><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Comic Sans MS"; mso-font-width:116%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE"> <b>“Whether the Claimant/Respondent's suit is </b></span></i><b><i><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Comic Sans MS"; mso-font-width:109%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE">statute-barred".<o:p></o:p></span></i></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0in;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify;line-height:normal"><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Comic Sans MS"; mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE">In arguing this issue Counsel submitted that for the Court to determine the period of limitation, it has to look at the statement of Claim. Counsel referred to the case of<b> Nigeria Ports Plc vs. Osinuga (2001) FWLR (Part 55) 514</b>, th</span><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS"; mso-font-width:105%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE">e Court of </span><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-font-width:105%; mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE">Appeal held that: </span><i><span style="font-size:12.0pt;font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-font-width:116%; mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE"><o:p></o:p></span></i></p> <p class="Style" style="margin-left:72.45pt;text-align:justify"><b><i><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS"; mso-font-width:115%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE">“It is trite law that in order to determine the period of limitation, one has to look at the writ of summons and the Statement of claim, alleging when the wrong was committed which gave the plaintiff a cause of action and by comparing that date with that on which the writ of summons was filed. If the time on the writ is beyond the period allowed by the limitation law, then the action is statute-barred. See Egbe v. Adefarasin </span></i></b><b><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-font-width:105%; mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE">(1987) 1 </span></b><b><i><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS"; mso-font-width:115%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE">NWLR (Part </span></i></b><b><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS"; mso-font-width:105%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE">47) 1; </span></b><b><i><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS"; mso-font-width:115%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE">Omotayo vs. NRC (supra). In the instant case, the action was instituted or commenced at the trial court on 17<sup>th</sup> December, </span></i></b><b><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-font-width:105%; mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE">1996. </span></b><b><i><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS"; mso-font-width:115%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE">That is to say after </span></i></b><b><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-font-width:105%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US; mso-bidi-language:HE">5 </span></b><b><i><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-font-width:115%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US; mso-bidi-language:HE">years and </span></i></b><b><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-font-width:105%; mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE">7 </span></b><b><i><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-font-width:115%; mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE">months. As soon as cause of action arises, time begins to run. In the light of the aforesaid therefore, I hold that the action was statute-barred as at the time it was instituted at the trial court." <o:p></o:p></span></i></b></p> <p class="Style" style="text-align:justify;tab-stops:.45pt 35.75pt"><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language: HE"> </span><span style="font-size:4.0pt; font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE"><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Style" style="text-align:justify;tab-stops:.45pt 35.75pt"><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language: HE"> Counsel therefore stated that from the Claimant pleadings in paragraph 9 of his Statement of Facts as follows: <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Style" style="margin-left:37.65pt;text-align:justify"><b><i><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS"; mso-font-width:115%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE">"The copy of the medical report from</span></i></b><b><i><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-bidi-font-family:Arial; mso-font-width:128%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE"> </span></i></b><b><i><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS"; mso-font-width:115%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE">the University of Port Harcourt Teaching Hospital dated 9<sup>th</sup> October, 2007 which clearly explains the state of the Claimant's hearing condition, <u>when the Defendant unilaterally and callously terminated his appointment is hereby attached and shall be relied upon as evidence in this matter</u> ....” <u><o:p></o:p></u></span></i></b></p> <p class="Style" style="text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS"; mso-font-width:105%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE">The second medical report which the Claimant also referred to in the said paragraph of his pleadings was actually earlier in time than 2007. It is dated 11/10/2002. It is clear from the pleading of the Claimant that as at October 2002 or even later, on 09/10/2007, the cause of action arose because from the Claimant's own showing, that was when his appointment was terminated. </span><b><i><u><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS"; mso-font-width:115%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE"><o:p></o:p></span></u></i></b></p> <p class="Style" style="margin-right:3.8pt;text-align:justify;tab-stops:.45pt 35.25pt"><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language: HE">It is Counsel’s position that the cause of action would arise when the factual situations set out by the Plaintiff/Claimant which, if substantiated, would entitle him to a remedy against the Defendant. See the cases of<b> Utih vs. Egorr </b></span><b><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS"; mso-bidi-font-family:Arial;mso-font-width:142%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US; mso-bidi-language:HE">& </span></b><b><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-font-width:105%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US; mso-bidi-language:HE">Ors (1990) 5 NWLR (Part 153) 771 at 783; Egbe vs. Adefarasin (1985) 1 NWLR (Part 3) 549; Alese vs. Aladetuyi (1995) 6 NWLR (Part 403) 527</span></b><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-font-width: 105%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE">. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Style" style="margin-right:3.8pt;text-align:justify"><span style="font-size:4.0pt;font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-font-width:105%; mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE"> </span></p> <p class="Style" style="margin-right:3.8pt;text-align:justify"><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-font-width:105%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US; mso-bidi-language:HE">Counsel cited Section 7 (1) (a) of the Limitation Act, 1966 which is the applicable Law, and which provides as follows: <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Style" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:3.4pt;margin-bottom:0in; margin-left:37.9pt;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:justify"><i><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-font-width:115%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US; mso-bidi-language:HE">"7 </span></i><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS"; mso-font-width:115%;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">(1) <i>The following actions shall not be brought after the expiration of six years from the date on which the cause of action accrued:-<o:p></o:p></i></span></p> <p class="Style" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:3.4pt;margin-bottom:0in; margin-left:37.9pt;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:justify"><b><i><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-font-width:113%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US; mso-bidi-language:HE">(a) actions founded on simple contract; ... </span></i></b><b><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-font-width:113%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US; mso-bidi-language:HE">" <o:p></o:p></span></b></p> <p class="Style" style="margin-right:3.15pt;text-align:justify;tab-stops:-14.2pt .25pt"><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language: HE"> Counsel further submitted that employment contracts which are not clothed with statutory flavor are regarded or classified as simple contracts. By the express provisions of the above Law, no action relating to simple contract can be commenced after <b>six [6] years from the date the cause of action accrued.<o:p></o:p></b></span></p> <p class="Style" style="margin-right:3.15pt;text-align:justify;tab-stops:-14.2pt .25pt"><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language: HE;mso-bidi-font-weight:bold">Also</span><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS"; mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE">, <b>Section 8 (1) and (2) </b>of the said <b>Limitation Act </b>provides as follows: <b><o:p></o:p></b></span></p> <p class="Style" style="margin-left:36.25pt;text-align:justify;text-indent:15.35pt"><b><i><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-bidi-font-family:Arial;mso-font-width: 76%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE">“8. </span></i></b><b><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-bidi-font-family:Arial;mso-font-width: 76%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE">- </span></b><b><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-bidi-font-family:Arial;mso-ansi-language: EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE">(1) </span></b><b><i><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS"; mso-font-width:113%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE">This section applies to action claiming damages for negligence, nuisance, or breach of duty (whether the duty exists by virtue of a contract or of a provision made by or under an enactment or independently of any contract or of any such provision), where the damages claimed by the Plaintiff for the negligence, nuisance or breach of duty consist of or include damages in respect of personal injuries to any person. <o:p></o:p></span></i></b></p> <p class="Style" style="margin-top:0in;margin-right:2.9pt;margin-bottom:0in; margin-left:36.95pt;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:justify"><b><i><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-font-width:113%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US; mso-bidi-language:HE">(2) subject to the provisions of this section, no action to which this section applies shall be brought after the expiration of three years from the date on which the cause of action accrued. </span></i></b><b><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-font-width:113%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US; mso-bidi-language:HE">" <o:p></o:p></span></b></p> <p class="Style" style="margin-right:4.1pt;text-align:justify;tab-stops:35.05pt"><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language: HE">It is Counsel’s submission that this action is statute-barred having been filed more than <b>7</b> <b>years </b>after the cause of action arose on <b>09/10/2007 </b>and after the <b>3 years or at most six [6] </b>allowed by statute. Counsel also referred to and relied on the cases of <b>Oguwuko vs. Shelle (2004) 6 NWLR (Part 868) 17 [Court of Appeal]. <o:p></o:p></b></span></p> <p class="Style" style="margin-right:4.1pt;text-align:justify;tab-stops:35.05pt"><span style="font-size:4.0pt;font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-ansi-language:EN-US; mso-bidi-language:HE;mso-bidi-font-weight:bold"> </span></p> <p class="Style" style="margin-right:4.1pt;text-align:justify;tab-stops:35.05pt"><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language: HE;mso-bidi-font-weight:bold">Counsel cited </span><span style="font-family: "Comic Sans MS";mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE">the case of <b>Forestry Research Institute of Nigeria vs. Gold (2007) 11 NWLR (Part 1044) 1 [Supreme Court]</b>, where the Respondent was dismissed from the employment of the Appellant and he did not file a suit challenging his dismissal until after 3 years of his dismissal. The Supreme Court agreed with the application for dismissal of the suit filed by the appellant and dismissed the said suit.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Style" style="margin-right:4.1pt;text-align:justify;tab-stops:35.05pt"><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:4.1pt;text-align:justify;tab-stops:35.05pt"><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language: HE">Counsel stated that the basic or fundamental principle of law with regard to actions that are statute-barred has always remained the same. Therefore Counsel submitted that a legal right to enforce an action is not a perpetual right, but rather it is a right which is generally limited by statute. That means that a cause of action is statute-barred, as earlier submitted, if legal proceedings were not commenced in respect of same within the prescribed time limited by law and therefore cannot be entertained by the Court of law because the period laid down by the limitation law had lapsed. See the case of <b>Adeosun vs. Jazesun (2001) 14 WRN 106 [Court of Appeal]. <o:p></o:p></b></span></p> <p class="Style" style="margin-right:4.6pt;text-align:justify;tab-stops:1.65pt 35.3pt"><span style="font-size:4.0pt;font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-ansi-language:EN-US; mso-bidi-language:HE;mso-bidi-font-weight:bold"> </span></p> <p class="Style" style="margin-right:4.6pt;text-align:justify;tab-stops:1.65pt 35.3pt"><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language: HE;mso-bidi-font-weight:bold">Finally, Counsel<b> </b></span><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language: HE">submitted that this Court lacks jurisdiction or has been divested of the requisite jurisdiction to hear and determine the suit as presently constituted because the action was not commenced within the time prescribed by the limitation law. Counsel states that regarding the appropriate order to be made by this Court if it so finds and holds that the matter is statute barred, the appropriate order is one dismissing the entire suit for being statute-barred. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Style" style="margin-right:.25pt;text-align:justify;tab-stops:1.65pt 36.95pt"><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:1.65pt 36.95pt"><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language: HE">The Claimant did not file any counter affidavit nor address the Court on point of law after being served with the Motion on Notice, instead on the 8<sup>th</sup> of December 2015 he filed a motion on notice seeking for leave to amend his statement of facts which he motion the Claimant eventually abandoned.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="Style" style="margin-right:.25pt;text-align:justify;line-height:16.55pt; mso-line-height-rule:exactly;tab-stops:1.65pt 36.95pt"><span style="font-family: "Comic Sans MS";mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE"> </span></p> <p class="Style" align="center" style="margin-right:.25pt;text-align:center; line-height:16.55pt;mso-line-height-rule:exactly;tab-stops:1.65pt 36.95pt"><b><u><span style="font-size:13.0pt; font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE">COURT’S DECISION<o:p></o:p></span></u></b></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Comic Sans MS";">The Defendant has prayed this court to dismiss the suit for want of jurisdiction on the ground that the suit is statute barred. In the affidavit in support of the application, the facts deposed therein are that the Claimant filed this suit on 1<sup>st</sup> April 2015 but his cause of action, as pleaded in paragraph 9 of the statement of facts, arose on 9<sup>th</sup> October 2006 being the date of the medical report which disclosed the Claimant’s hearing condition. It was further averred that the suit is statute barred which condition divests this court of jurisdiction to hear and determine the suit. In his argument on the motion, the Defendant’s counsel cited Sections 7 and 8 of the Limitation Act 1966 and submitted that the Claimant’s suit is statute barred.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size: 4pt; font-family: "Comic Sans MS";"> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><em><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Comic Sans MS"; font-style: normal;">Section 7 (1) (a) of the Limitation Act, 1966 provides that</span></em><em><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Comic Sans MS";"> <b>actions founded on simple contract shall not be brought after the expiration of six years from the date on which the cause of action accrued</b> </span></em><em><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Comic Sans MS"; font-style: normal;">while Section 8 (1) and (2) of the Act provides that</span></em><em><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Comic Sans MS";"> <b>actions in which the claim is for damages for negligence, nuisance, or breach of duty or damages in respect of personal injuries to any person shall not be brought after the expiration of three years from the date on which the cause of action accrued</b>. <o:p></o:p></span></em></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><em><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size: 4pt; font-family: "Comic Sans MS";"> </span></em></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><em><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Comic Sans MS"; font-style: normal;">The relationship between the parties from which the claim in this case arose was a contract of employment. Contracts of employment are no doubt simple contracts. Furthermore, the facts of the Claimant’s case disclose that his claim is for personal injury founded on the Defendant’s breach of duty of care owed to him as an employee. In paragraphs 8 and 9 of the statement of facts, the Claimant averred that when he first experienced the hearing loss, he reported to the Defendant but the Defendant refused to do anything about it. He took himself to the University of Port Harcourt Teaching Hospital where his medical report dated 9<sup>th</sup> October 2007 revealed his hearing condition. Going by the facts pleaded by the Claimant, his cause of action in this suit accrued on the date of the medical report.</span></em><em><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Comic Sans MS";"> </span></em><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Comic Sans MS";">By the cited provisions of the Limitation Act 1966, the action of the Claimant ought to be commenced against the Defendant not later than 6 years from the accrual of the cause of action. But in his case, he filed the suit on 1<sup>st</sup> April 2015 which is a period of 7 years 5 months from when his cause of action arose. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size: 4pt; font-family: "Comic Sans MS";"> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Comic Sans MS";">I am not unmindful of previous decisions of this court with regard to claims for pension. The scenario here is however clearly distinguishable. In this case, it is only relief (i) of the complaint that makes reference to pension in very speculative terms. I have gone through the entire Statement of Facts and nothing therein makes the slightest reference to facts supporting the claim for pension. I have even gone the extra mile of perusing the Claimant’s motion for amendment of this Statement of Facts (which the Claimant’s counsel has since abandoned), but nothing therein makes any reference to a claim for pension. In my view, the Claimant’s counsel merely put that relief in his Complaint, to deceive the Court into believing that this is a claim for pension. Clearly, the cause of action as disclosed in the Statement of Facts, is <em><span style="font-style: normal;">for personal injury founded on the Defendant’s breach of duty of care owed to him as an employee. I so hold. </span></em> <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size: 4pt; font-family: "Comic Sans MS";"> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Comic Sans MS";">Where the law provides for the bringing of an action within a prescribed period of time, proceedings cannot not be brought after the time prescribed by the statute. An action brought outside the prescribed period is contrary to the provision of the law and does not give rise to a cause of action nor can it be entertained by the courts. See <b>ELEBANJO vs. DAWODU (2006) All FWLR (Pt. 328) 604;</b> <b>INEC vs. OKORONKWO (2009) All FWLR (Pt. 488) 227 at 247. </b>By the effect of the Limitation of Act, the Claimants’ suit is clearly statute barred having been filed more than a period of 6 years from the time the cause of action arose. Consequently, the suit is statute barred and this court lacks jurisdiction to entertain same. The suit is hereby dismissed. No order as to cost.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size: 4pt; font-family: "Comic Sans MS";"> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Comic Sans MS";">Ruling is delivered accordingly.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Comic Sans MS";"> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Comic Sans MS";"> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><b><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size: 13pt; font-family: "Comic Sans MS";">Hon. Justice O. Y. Anuwe<o:p></o:p></span></b></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify"><span lang="EN-GB" style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: "Comic Sans MS";">Judge<b><o:p></o:p></b></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Comic Sans MS";mso-font-width: 109%;mso-ansi-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:HE;mso-bidi-font-style:italic"> </span></p>