Download PDF
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify"><b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:13.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:14.0pt; line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">REPRESENTATION<o:p></o:p></span></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify"><b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:13.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:14.0pt; line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">O. O. Iranloye with him are Ikomah Ukandu, Niyi Sodeinde, T.O Williams for the claimant<o:p></o:p></span></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify"><b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:13.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:14.0pt; line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">O. Oyebowale (Mrs) with her are O. Uye, B. Omojola, Miss O. Somoye for the defendant. <o:p></o:p></span></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="text-align:center"><b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:13.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:14.0pt; line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"> </span></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal" align="center" style="text-align:center"><b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:13.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:14.0pt; line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">JUDGMENT<o:p></o:p></span></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">The claimant filed a complaint on the 24<sup>th </sup>July, 2015, wherein he claimed against the defendant as follows:<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:27.0pt;text-align:justify;text-indent: -27.0pt"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family: "Times New Roman",serif">1. The sum of N65,662,521.82 (Sixty Five Million, Six Hundred and Sixty Two Thousand, Five Hundred and Twenty One Naira, Eighty Two kobo) being the unpaid Gratuity, Profit Sharing for the year 2013 and Performance Inducement Pay (PIP) 2014.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:27.0pt;text-align:justify;text-indent: -27.0pt"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family: "Times New Roman",serif">2. Interest on the N65,662,521.82 at 15% from September 15, 2014 to 15<sup>th</sup> September, 2015 until judgment and thereafter until the judgment debt is fully and finally liquidate with cost.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">The case of the claimant as contained in his written statement on oath dated 24th July,2015 as adopted by him on the 18th January, 2016 is that he was offered employment as Senior Manager in defendant’s employment effective from November 1, 2006. That apart from remuneration payable by the defendant to him, it was the term of defendant’s offer letter that he shall be entitled as a Senior Manager to:<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family: "Times New Roman",serif">* Performance Allowance<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family: "Times New Roman",serif">* Other allowances (MMS)<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family: "Times New Roman",serif">* 28 days working leave<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:0cm; margin-left:36.0pt;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:justify;text-indent:-36.0pt"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">* Car ownership share – one 1.8. over 4 years with right of purchase at net book value or 10% of cost whichever is lower<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:0cm; margin-left:36.0pt;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:justify;text-indent:-36.0pt"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">* Club membership<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:0cm; margin-left:36.0pt;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:justify;text-indent:-36.0pt"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">* Foreign Travel<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:0cm; margin-left:36.0pt;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:justify;text-indent:-36.0pt"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">* Retirement – Mandatory and voluntarily age is 60 and 45 years profit sharing<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:0cm; margin-left:36.0pt;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:justify;text-indent:-36.0pt"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">* Mortgage loan<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-top:0cm;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:0cm; margin-left:36.0pt;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align:justify;text-indent:-36.0pt"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">* Life insurance. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">That on 15<sup>th</sup> May, 2008, following general review of salary structure by defendant’s Management, he was advised as Senior Manager of upward review of his salary structure which among others include:<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family: "Times New Roman",serif">* Driver allowance N240,000.00<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family: "Times New Roman",serif">* Vehicle maintenance N120,000.00<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family: "Times New Roman",serif">* Other allowance N2,500,000.00<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family: "Times New Roman",serif">* 13 months salary N100% of month basic salary<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">* Performance allowance N1,500,000.00<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">That the remuneration package was approved by the Board and which package was in line with same salary structure of the bank and that he was notified by a letter dated February 26, 2008 from the Managing Director of defendant that with effect from January 1, 2008, he shall be entitled to the following benefits:<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family: "Times New Roman",serif">* Driver allowance N240,000.00<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family: "Times New Roman",serif">* Car maintenance and fueling N120,000.00<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family: "Times New Roman",serif">* Holiday allowance £1750<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">* 2 Economy Ticket<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">That he was also advised of other due made payable to him as follows:<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family: "Times New Roman",serif">* Cost of Economy Class Ticket to London @ N289, 000 = N448, 000<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">* Estacode of £1750 paid @ N256,000 = N576, 000<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Claimant stated that he gave Notice of his intention to proceed on voluntary retirement from service with effect from September 15, 2014 having worked for 17 years by a letter dated 16<sup>th</sup> June, 2014 to the Chairman, Board of Directors of the defendant and that following the meeting between him and two Board Directors of defendant, Mr. Anogwi Anyanwu and Mr. Kola Ayeye on 1<sup>st</sup> September, 2014 his notice of voluntary retirement was upheld, he then as the Acting Managing Director/CEO wrote a letter dated September 4, 2014 and reiterate his earlier intention of voluntary retirement which notice expired in September 15, 2014.Also, that on September 4, 2014 he wrote to the Executive Director, Corporate Banking of defendant following his meeting with the said two Board of Directors reiterating the notice of retirement which was also upheld and thereby forwarded his handover note to the new Managing Director, Mr. Akingbola Oluwadare. Again, by a letter dated February 12, 2015, he wrote to the Managing Director of the defendant demanding for his severance benefit as follows:<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family: "Times New Roman",serif">* Gratuity Annual salary plus allowance N63,813,521.00<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family: "Times New Roman",serif">* Profit Sharing for the year 2013 N600,000.00<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify"><!--[if gte vml 1]><v:shapetype id="_x0000_t32" coordsize="21600,21600" o:spt="32" o:oned="t" path="m,l21600,21600e" filled="f"> <v:path arrowok="t" fillok="f" o:connecttype="none"/> <o:lock v:ext="edit" shapetype="t"/> </v:shapetype><v:shape id="_x0000_s1026" type="#_x0000_t32" style='position:absolute; left:0;text-align:left;margin-left:318.9pt;margin-top:16.65pt;width:104.25pt; height:0;z-index:251658240' o:connectortype="straight"/><![endif]--><!--[if !vml]--><span style="mso-ignore:vglayout;position:absolute;z-index:251658240;left:0px; margin-left:424px;margin-top:22px;width:141px;height:2px"><img width="141" height="2" src="file:///C:/Users/TEE%20SAM/AppData/Local/Packages/oice_16_974fa576_32c1d314_8c8/AC/Temp/msohtmlclip1/01/clip_image001.gif" v:shapes="_x0000_s1026"></span><!--[endif]--><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size: 14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">* 2014 Performance Inducement Pay (PIP) N1,250,000.00<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify"><!--[if gte vml 1]><v:shape id="_x0000_s1028" type="#_x0000_t32" style='position:absolute;left:0;text-align:left; margin-left:320.4pt;margin-top:17.65pt;width:104.25pt;height:0;z-index:251660288' o:connectortype="straight"/><![endif]--><!--[if !vml]--><span style="mso-ignore: vglayout;position:absolute;z-index:251660288;left:0px;margin-left:426px; margin-top:23px;width:141px;height:2px"><img width="141" height="2" src="file:///C:/Users/TEE%20SAM/AppData/Local/Packages/oice_16_974fa576_32c1d314_8c8/AC/Temp/msohtmlclip1/01/clip_image002.gif" v:shapes="_x0000_s1028"></span><!--[endif]--><!--[if gte vml 1]><v:shape id="_x0000_s1027" type="#_x0000_t32" style='position:absolute;left:0;text-align:left; margin-left:319.65pt;margin-top:16.15pt;width:104.25pt;height:0;z-index:251659264' o:connectortype="straight"/><![endif]--><!--[if !vml]--><span style="mso-ignore: vglayout;position:absolute;z-index:251659264;left:0px;margin-left:425px; margin-top:21px;width:141px;height:2px"><img width="141" height="2" src="file:///C:/Users/TEE%20SAM/AppData/Local/Packages/oice_16_974fa576_32c1d314_8c8/AC/Temp/msohtmlclip1/01/clip_image002.gif" v:shapes="_x0000_s1027"></span><!--[endif]--><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size: 14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"> <b>N65,662,521.82<o:p></o:p></b></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">He further stated that following refusal of the defendant to honour his demand letter of February 12, 2015 reminding defendant of his unpaid entitlement, six months after retirement, he further wrote to defendant on 10<sup>th</sup> March, 2015 and that on 16<sup>th</sup> June, 2015 he through his Solicitors, O.O. Iranloye & Co demanded for payment of his severance benefit and entitlement as calculated above in line with defendant’s policies, Terms and Condition of service. That the severance benefit payable to him at the point of exit shall be as follows:<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify"><b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family: "Times New Roman",serif">A. Cash Payment:</span></b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%; font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt;text-align:justify"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Annual Basic Salary plus all allowances for every year of service up to the limit of five years of service.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify"><b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family: "Times New Roman",serif">B. Other Benefits:<o:p></o:p></span></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family: "Times New Roman",serif"> i. Purchase of car under Ownership Scheme:-<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:72.0pt;text-align:justify"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Staff with Company car(s) under Car Ownership shall be allowed to purchase the car at a book value or 10% of original cost (whichever is less) <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family: "Times New Roman",serif"> ii. Loan Repayment on Outstanding Loans:-<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:72.0pt;text-align:justify"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">50% of all outstanding Loans (Personal, Car and Mortgage) shall be deducted from the total value of the severance benefit while the balance shall be paid as an interest rate of 5% per annum for a Term to be mutually agreed.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">That by the policies, Terms and Conditions of service of defendant with him, as Acting Managing Director/CEO, he having been in defendant service for not less than five (5) years could resign his appointment voluntarily and he is entitled to gratuity as follows:<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family: "Times New Roman",serif">* 100% of Annual Basic Salary plus<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family: "Times New Roman",serif">* Housing Allowance<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">* Transport Allowance<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">That the sum shall be multiplied by the number of years he served defendant. It is his claim against the defendant that it has failed, neglected and omitted to pay to him his gratuity and all other emolument owed and due to him by the defendant.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">During trial the claimant tendered documents which were admitted and marked as Exhibits CS-CS13. He testified that he sued the defendant. That he served the defendant for 12 years. He stated that the pay on performance is static and was stated in his letter of employment and he started receiving same in 2007 and the last performance pay he received from the defendant was N1,250,000 in 2010. He denied that performance pay has been in fluctuations and never fixed. He admitted that he was a member of the defendant’s board from February, 2011 till when he resigned from the defendant’s Company and that he attended all the meeting held. He also stated that he has copies of the minutes of all the meetings he attended but they are with his lawyer. He admitted that the approval of the staff handbook is a function of the Board and until the board approves it, it cannot be functional. With regards to the approval of the handbook CW posited that there was a committee established by the then MD and he was appointed to chair the committee and the committee met and produced a staff handbook and submitted to the MD in 2008 and that it was not his responsibility to ensure the approval of the handbook and since the handbook became operational he took same for granted that it has been approved. He denied being indebted to the claimant. He admitted that upon his retirement he was advised as to his benefits but he does not know the basis of the calculation. CW stated that he directed his resignation letter to Mainstreet bank because the MD of Mainstreet bank was Chairman to all its subsidiaries. He also posited that he gave exhibit CS6 to the defendant because it is the defendant that would pay him his benefits upon exit. It is claimant’s evidence that the defendant gave him a Camry car as a status car and he added money to buy the Prado jeep. He stated that the Toyota Camry was sold to him at the rate of N1,000. He continued that in March 2013 the defendant approved the sum of N10,095,000 for him to buy a jeep but he added the sum of N405,000 to enable him buy the jeep. He also posited that the receipt was in both defendant’s name and his because the previous car was so written. He further stated that under the defendant car ownership scheme employees have the right to buy a status car at 10% of the value of the car after four years or net book value whichever is lower. That as at the time he left the defendant’s employment the car was not yet 4 years and he admitted that the car is in his possession. He denied that he did not exit before the notice date for his retirement on the ground that he was proceeding on leave. It is his position that the defendant wanted him to do something against his faith and he decided to leave. He stated that when the former MD C. Ukandu left the management ordered that he should not be paid and that on the 28/06/13 he was asked to retrench about 29 staff and they were not paid. They went to court and the defendant's counsel one Mekwunye swore to an affidavit in his name, he went through it and discovered that they were all lies against the exited staff and the MD. He stated that he informed counsel that as a Christian he cannot sign this affidavit and counsel told him that it is just for record purposes but he refused to sign same as he cannot deny them their benefits. That Counsel Charles Mekwunye then reported him to the MD who compelled him to sign that it was not going to be used. That on the 16/9/14 counsel sent a letter to him to come to court and testify but he elected to go to the head office and submit his resignation letter rather than come to court to lie against the exited staff. He also stated that his appointment letter also provided that upon his exit he is to go with his status car. He stated that his 13<sup>th</sup> month pay is payable in December, with his December, salary and that it is paid to those on the defendant’s pay roll as at 31<sup>st</sup> of December of the year. He admitted that he is not entitled to 13<sup>th</sup> month salary in 2014. He admitted that he did not react to exhibit CS13 because he knows he was coming to court to get it explained. He denied that the sum of N1,754,820.00 was credited to his account.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">The defendant in its defence admitted that the claimant was its erstwhile Acting Managing Director/Chief Executive Officer, but contended that the claimant is not entitled to the sum of N65,662,521.82 as claimed or at all. It stated that the terminal benefit of the claimant at the point of his exit was the sum of N1,754,820.00 and which same has been paid to him but that it is the claimant that is indebted to it in the sum of N4,956,930.00. Defendant further contended that contrary to claimant’s statement of fact, the defendant in accordance with the terms and conditions of claimant's employment duly advised the claimant as to his entitlement by a letter dated April 27, 2015 and that the basis of calculation applied to his terminal benefits is in line with the policies and standards of the defendant and which same was applied by claimant while in employment. Defendant stated that by its compensation structure, profit sharing and performance allowance are never fixed earnings of the claimant but contingent on a number of variables and conditions. It stated that profit sharing is purely contingent on the profit of the defendant as declared by the Board of Directors and that the sharing percentage as may be determined by the Board having regard to so many other contingences and economic variables, performance allowances is assessed by management based on individual performance and that the claimant was not qualified for any of these allowances and that any of these allowances including 13<sup>th</sup> month salary if they become necessary to any are only payable to a staff whose employment is current with the company.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Defendant denied of the statement of fact and averred that there is nothing like Board Paper titled Remuneration Package for staff and that the operational staff manual which only came into existence on June 6, 2014 is a further document containing terms and conditions of employment. It pleaded that the document described as Afribank Registrars Limited Staff Handbook does not exist. It is the averment of the defendant that the claimant informed the Board of Directors on the 11<sup>th</sup> December, 2013 that the staff Handbook he referred to in his statement of fact being unlawful had been withdrawn. It again stated that it duly remitted all and every of the claimant’s Pension contributions to his Pension Fund Manager and that he is entitled to visit his Pension Fund Manager for any of his pension claims. It is defendant’s further averment that the claimant absconded with a Toyota Prado Jeep with Registration Number EKY 899 BE which was just 18 months and did not fall within depreciated book value of which he may be entitled to purchase at a discount and continues to detain same at the detriment of the defendant. Defendant whereof stated that the claimant’s claim is frivolous, vexatious and completely outside the terms of his employment which ought to be dismissed with substantial cost.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">By way of counterclaim, defendant/counterclaimant averred that it purchased a Toyota Prado 2012 Model Jeep for its operations at the cost of N10,095,000.00. Defendant also averred that additional cost in the sum of N3,500.00 per day was incurred to provide alternative mobility vehicle for the new Managing Director/Chief Executive Officer and the Jeep was assigned to the claimant for use only while in its employment and that the Jeep is still in the custody of the defendant to the counterclaim till date. It pleaded that the additional cost is recoverable from the claimant and he has failed to relinquish the said Jeep in his custody.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Whereof the Counter-claimant claims against the defendant to the counter-claim as follows:<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt;text-align:justify;text-indent: -36.0pt"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family: "Times New Roman",serif">a. A Declaration that the counterclaimant is entitled to recover the Toyota Prado Jeep from the defendant to the counterclaim.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt;text-align:justify;text-indent: -36.0pt"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family: "Times New Roman",serif">b. An Order compelling the defendant to the counter-claim to return Toyota Prado Jeep with registration number EKY 899 BE to the counter-claimant same being the property of the counter-claimant.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt;text-align:justify;text-indent: -36.0pt"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family: "Times New Roman",serif">c. An Order for the sum of N3,500.00 per day from 4<sup>th</sup> September, 2014 till date of judgment being the cost of alternative transportation expenses incurred by the defendant to finance its new Managing Director/Chief Executive Officer.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt;text-align:justify;text-indent: -36.0pt"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family: "Times New Roman",serif">d. Damages in the sum of N10 million for detinue (wrongful detention of the said Toyota Prado Jeep)<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt;text-align:justify;text-indent: -36.0pt"><b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">ALTERNATIVELY AND ONLY IN THE ALTERNATIVE</span></b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt; line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt;text-align:justify;text-indent: -36.0pt"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family: "Times New Roman",serif">i. An Order directing the claimant to pay the sum of N10,095,000.00 being the value of the Counter-claimant’s Jeep.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt;text-align:justify;text-indent: -36.0pt"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family: "Times New Roman",serif">ii. An Order for the sum of N3,500.00 per day from 4<sup>th</sup> September, 2014 till date of judgment being the cost of alternative transportation expenses incurred by the defendant to finance its new Managing Director/Chief Executive Officer<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left:36.0pt;text-align:justify;text-indent: -36.0pt"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family: "Times New Roman",serif">iii. Interest on N10,095,000.00 at the rate of 15% from 15<sup>th</sup> September, 2014 until judgment is delivered and thereafter 10% until judgment sum is fully liquidated.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify;tab-stops:0cm"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">The defendant during trial testified through one Akingbola Oluwadare. He adopted his witness statement on oath as his evidence. He tendered documents which were admitted and marked as exhibit OA-OA4. He stated that he took over from the claimant as the Acting MD. He admitted that in exhibit CS there is a provision for payment of a yearly allowance of N1,250,000 and N750,000 and that there is also a provision for profit sharing. He denied that as at the time of the employment of the claimant there was a staff handbook. He admitted that exhibit CS1 is from the defendant notifying him of the review of his salary structure. He stated that the purchase of the jeep is to be stated in the letter of offer of employment but the minute of meeting may not contain that but may be in a letter of provision to the status of staff and all would be amortized in 4 years. DW admitted also that the claimant added money to purchase the jeep but that is the practice in the defendant company. He further contended that exhibit CS7 is not the handbook of Afribank registrars, but admitted that there is staff Handbook for the defendant. He further admitted that exhibit CS8 is in the joint name of defendant and claimant. He stated that the claimant's Toyota Corrolla was sold for N1,000 to him, having fully been amortised. It is the further testimony of DW that the defendant till date has not refunded the money added by the claimant to purchase the Toyota Prado Jeep.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">On the 29<sup>th</sup> October, 2015, claimant filed a reply to statement of defence and defence to counterclaim wherein he reiterated that he was the Acting Managing Director/CEO of the defendant until his voluntary retirement. He averred that the remuneration package of defendant staff was approved by the Board and which was in line with same salary structure of the defendant’s Bank. He stated that defendant never paid him any terminal benefit at the point of his exit in the sum of <b>N1,754,820</b> as alleged or at all but reiterated that his severance benefits is <b>N65,662,521.82</b>.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">He stated that the defendant has failed, neglected and omitted to pay him his lawful exit benefits as contracted or at all. It is his pleading that by the policies, terms and conditions of service of defendant with claimant, as Acting Managing Director/CEO, he having been in defendant service for not less than five (5) years, he could resign his appointment voluntarily and he is entitled to gratuity as earlier stated in his statement of facts. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">That the computation made herein is in accordance with his letter of employment and other benefits he is entitled to and his claim for compensation, profit sharing and performance are paid based on companies performance which is 10% of Profit Before Tax and profit sharing is contingent on the profit of the defendant as shown in the published Auditors Account and shared among staff of defendant in letter of employment proportion of their earnings considering their respective letter of employment. He denied the averment of the defendant that he is not entitled to gratuity and relied on his letter of employment as well as Review of salary structures and other benefit notification issued by the defendant to him , he also relied on the defendant’s letter titled to Isesele Stanley’s Resignation of appointment and cheque wherein the Branch Manager was paid N3,212,748.75 as severance benefit in line with defendant staff condition of service. He pleaded that the Toyota Prado Jeep was jointly financed by him and the defendant and that the Board resolved and approved purchase of 2013 Toyota Camry as the official/status car to him. That following the approval, he completed the balance of N405,000 to <b>Elim Motors Nigeria Limited</b> for purchase of the said Toyota Prado Jeep. He relied on the minute of meeting held on Monday 11<sup>th</sup> March, 2013 and Elim Motor Nigeria Limited official Receipt No. 000548 and 0005488 dated 22/03/2013 and 25/03/2013 respectively. He further stated that he never absconded with defendant’s car but stated that the Jeep is jointly financed and owned and at determination of his employment, the defendant equity is to be repaid with 10% of the book value. That the said Jeep was jointly owned by him and the defendant as the defendant paid <b>N10,095,000</b> while he paid <b>N405,000.00</b>. Further averment is that the Toyota Corolla 1.8 bought on 17<sup>th</sup> September, 2008 from INEC-MIC AUTOMOBILED CO. LTD at<b> N3,450,000</b> was sold to him at <b>N1,000</b> under the defendant Car Ownership Scheme. He stated that no amount is recoverable from him as alleged or at all rather it was defendant/counterclaimant that is indebted to him on all unpaid severance benefit which is being detained till date.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">He further stated that all the averments in the defendant staff Handbook are correct and represent the policy guideline of defendant which apply to him and also used in Suit NO. NICN/LA/335/2013. between Chester Onyemaechi Ukandu v Mainstreet bank Registrars Ltd. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family: "Times New Roman",serif">The defendant at the close of trial, on the 17<sup>th</sup> of June 2016 filed its written address wherein counsel on its behalf raised two issues for the court’s determination;<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family: "Times New Roman",serif"> </span></p> <p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-add-space:auto;text-align:justify;text-indent:-18.0pt;mso-list:l3 level1 lfo1"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"">1.<span style="font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-family: 'Times New Roman';"> </span></span><!--[endif]--><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Whether from the totality of the evidence before the court, the claimant has not failed to prove his claim in this suit.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpMiddle" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom: .0001pt;mso-add-space:auto;text-align:justify;text-indent:-18.0pt;mso-list: l3 level1 lfo1"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt; line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"">2.<span style="font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-family: 'Times New Roman';"> </span></span><!--[endif]--><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt; line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Whether in view of the clear evidence placed before the court, the defendant counter claimant is not entitled to its counter claim.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpLast" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-add-space:auto;text-align:justify"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt; line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family: "Times New Roman",serif">On issue one, counsel posited that claimant’s claims before the court is for gratuity, profit sharing for the year 2013 and performance inducement (PIP) 2014 all on the basis of his voluntary retirement with effect from 15<sup>th</sup> September, 2014. He stated that the evidence before the court shows that by Exhibit CS, a letter dated 16<sup>th</sup> of June, 2014 the claimant gave notice of his voluntary retirement with effect from September, 15 2014. Counsel posited that the claimant is not a witness of truth as his evidence in court is fraught with unpardonable uncertainties. Counsel stated that the claimant in paragraph 9 of his claim said that on the 16th of June, 2014 he gave notice of voluntary retirement to Mainstreet bank ltd. Under cross examination, he stated that <b>“I voluntarily sent my retirement notice because on 28/6/13, I was asked by MD to retrench staff as they were not paid benefit. I was asked by Mekunye to lie against the staff in court. I refused. When Mekunye on 16/9/14 sent me to come to NIC to testify. I elected to go to head office and submitted my letter of resignation. The wrong was done to me on the 13/9/14â€â€¦</b>counsel posited that in a further attempt to mislead the court claimant said <b>“I have no minutes of board meeting, the minutes are with my lawyers. <u>Until the board approves the staff handbook it cannot be operational</u>.â€</b> Counsel urged the court to disregard all the evidence of claimant as it is not in line with the legitimate practice of the defendant.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify"><b><u><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"> </span></u></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify"><b><u><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">On the Conditions for Voluntary Retirement.<o:p></o:p></span></u></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family: "Times New Roman",serif">Counsel submitted that the conditions for retirement were not even met by the claimant. That the claimant was entitled to voluntary retirement only after attaining the age of 45years and upon giving three months’ notice to the defendant. he stated that there was no evidence before the court as to the age of the claimant as at the time of the purported notice of retirement. Again the requirement of 3 months notice was not proved and the claimant also did admit that the notice intended for the defendant was actually on another entity, Mainstreet bank. It is counsel’s position that the claimant having admittedly served a notice intended for the defendant on another entity, such service is ineffectual and null and void. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify"><b><u><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"> </span></u></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify"><b><u><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">On the Claimant’s Reliance on a Handbook not Approved by the Board.<o:p></o:p></span></u></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family: "Times New Roman",serif">It is defence counsel’s submission that claimant’s claims is hinged on exhibit CS7, the alleged handbook of Afribank Registrars Ltd. he stated that the said handbook remained a draft product of a committee awaiting board’s approval until same was withdrawn and set aside by the board. It is contention of counsel that the claimant admitted under cross-examination that although he was a member of the committee who sat and produced the handbook exhibit CS7 in 2008, the said handbook was never approved by the board. He stated that DW1 tendered exhibit AO1 photocopy of internal memo of 20<sup>th</sup> December, 2013 issued by the claimant in his capacity as the acting MD of the defendant wherein he acknowledged that the handbook exhibit CS7 which was hitherto in circulation to staff was withdrawn pursuant to the resolution of the Board on the 11<sup>th</sup> of December, 2013. Thus having been withdrawn by the board with the full knowledge and consent of the claimant, the said exhibit CS7 ceased to be in existence. He urged the court to so hold.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify"><b><u><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"> </span></u></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify"><b><u><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">On Applicable Documents from which to Calculate the Claim<o:p></o:p></span></u></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family: "Times New Roman",serif">It is counsel submission that for claimant’s claims to succeed he must place before the court the basis for the alleged claims in accordance with Section 131 of the Evidence Act as the burden of proving the existence or non existence of fact is on the party against whom the judgment of the court would be given if no evidence were produced on either side. He cited the case of <b>Akande v Adisa [2012] 15 NWLR (Pt. 1324) 538 at 558. </b>He stated that a void document is no document hence exhibit CS7 having been shown to be ineffectual, null and void and cannot be of any adjudicatory value in this matter. He stated that the uncontroverted testimony of DW1 vide Exhibit OA2 the subsequent resolution of the board of the defendant dated 6<sup>th</sup> of June 2014 which the claimant was then a part shows the extant handbook applicable to the claimant’s employment. That the claimant by a letter dated 27/04/2015 exhibit OA was advised by the defendant as to his terminal benefits in the sum of N1,75,820.00 same having being calculated in line with the policies and standards of the claimant’s contract with the defendant and the claimant did not dispute the computation of his terminal benefits being 5% basis/ housing/transportation and lunch allowances. Continuing he posited that the claimant failed to show that the profit sharing formula he claims was ever decided by the board. Also he further posited that the claimant had admitted that the 13<sup>th</sup> month salary is usually paid along with December salary and that the 13<sup>th</sup> month pay always goes to staff who are on the pay roll of the defendants on the 31st December, of the relevant year. That the claimant not being on the defendant’s pay roll as at December, he is not entitled to the 13<sup>th</sup> month salary as claimed he urged the court to so hold.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify"><b><u><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"> </span></u></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify"><b><u><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Documents to be Discountenanced.<o:p></o:p></span></u></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family: "Times New Roman",serif">Counsel submitted that the Mainstreet bank alleged financial statement and the Board paper on remuneration package for staff should be expunged from the court record having not met the requirement of Sections 370-378 and 237 of the Company and Allied Matters Act, (CAMA). He urged the court to hold that the claimant is not entitled to any gratuity as claimed at all.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family: "Times New Roman",serif">On issue two, counsel posited that there’s evidence that the defendant purchased a Toyota Prado 2012 model jeep to aid the operations of the claimant as acting MD of the defendant barely 18 months to the exit of the claimant. That the claimant continued to detain the vehicle to the detriment of the defendant. He stated that claimant had admitted that he is in possession of the said Toyota Prado 2013 model jeep thereby compelling the defendant to incur additional cost in the sum of N3,500 per day to provide alternative mobility for the new MD. Counsel posited that from the pleadings before the court that the intention of the parties at the time the vehicle was purchased was that ownership thereof vests in the defendant until 4 years when the vehicle will be sold to the claimant at depreciated book value. Clearly therefore, joint ownership was not within the contemplation of the parties regardless of the claim of the claimant that he made part payment. Counsel urged the court to so hold and dismiss the claim of the claimant in its entirety and grant in its favour it counterclaim.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family: "Times New Roman",serif"> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family: "Times New Roman",serif">The claimant on the other hand filed his final written address on the 10<sup>th</sup> of November, 2016, and counsel on his behalf framed two issues for the court’s determination;<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family: "Times New Roman",serif"> </span></p> <p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-add-space:auto;text-align:justify;text-indent:-18.0pt;mso-list:l4 level1 lfo2"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"">1.<span style="font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-family: 'Times New Roman';"> </span></span><!--[endif]--><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Whether or not the claimant have proved his claim of N65,662,521.82 in respect of his unpaid gratuity, profit sharing for the year 2013 and performance inducement pay, as well as claim for 15% interest and cost as sought?<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpLast" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-add-space:auto;text-align:justify;text-indent:-18.0pt;mso-list:l4 level1 lfo2"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"">2.<span style="font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-family: 'Times New Roman';"> </span></span><!--[endif]--><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Whether or not the defendant have successfully proved its counterclaim against the claimant.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family: "Times New Roman",serif"> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family: "Times New Roman",serif">On issue one, it is counsel’s position that retirement age was not made an issue in its pleadings hence the defendant cannot raise surprise in the address as to the age of claimant who has served the defendant for 17 years. He stated that the claimant letter of notice of voluntary retirement dated 16<sup>th</sup> of June, 2014 exhibits CS6,7,8,9 were the document relied on by the defendant to compute the alleged terminal benefit, although they failed to show evidence of payment to the claimant. It is counsel’s submission that the claimant had proved all his claims in respect of unpaid gratuity, profit sharing for 2013 and performance inducement pay as alleged and thus entitled to payment of interest at 15% of the unpaid sum until the sum is paid with cost. He posited that it was the terms of the defendant’s offer letter that claimant shall be entitled as a senior manager to: <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify"><b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Performance allowance N25,000,000.00 yearly<o:p></o:p></span></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify"><b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Other allowances (MMS) N750,000.00 yearly<o:p></o:p></span></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify"><b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Car ownership scheme – one 1.8 liter car amortizied over 4 years with right of purchase at net book value or 10% of cost whichever is lower.<o:p></o:p></span></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family: "Times New Roman",serif"> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family: "Times New Roman",serif">Counsel posited that with regards to profit sharing a letter dated September, 20<sup>th</sup> 2006 contained the benefits due to him. That on the 15<sup>th</sup> of May, 2008 there was an upward review in his salary structure which among others include;<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify"><b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"> </span></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify"><b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Other allowance N25, 000,000.00<o:p></o:p></span></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify"><b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">13<sup>th</sup> month salary 100% of monthly basic salary<o:p></o:p></span></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify"><b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Performance allowance N1, 500,000.00<o:p></o:p></span></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family: "Times New Roman",serif"> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family: "Times New Roman",serif">Continuing counsel posited that the remuneration package of defendant staff was approved by the board and the package was in line with same salary structured of the bank. He stated that the claimant by a letter dated 16/06/ 2014 gave notice of his intention to proceed on voluntarily retirement from its service with effect from September, 15, 2014 having worked for 17 years and this was accepted by the defendant. Counsel submitted that upon the retirement of claimant and in line with the defendant’s policies, terms and condition of services, his entitlement stands in the sum of N65, 552,521.82 which includes his gratuity annual salary plus allowances in the sum of N63,813,521, profit sharing for the year 2013 N600,000.00 and 2014 performance inducement pay (PIP) N1,250,000.00.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family: "Times New Roman",serif"> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family: "Times New Roman",serif">Counsel submitted that where parties enter into a contract, they are bound by the terms thereof and the court will not allow them to read into such a contract, terms on which there is no agreement. He posited that the defendant argued to the alleged non-existent of staff handbook in claimant contract of employment although they provided to its in claimant letter of offer of appointment exhibit CS1. Counsel stated that claimant is entitled to interest on his unpaid severance benefits at 15% from 15<sup>th</sup> September, 2014 until judgment and thereafter until judgment debt is finally liquidated as well as payment of cost of the action. He relied on the case of <b>Skymit Motors Ltd v UBA [2014] All FWLR (Pt. 721) 1547</b> and urged the court to so hold.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family: "Times New Roman",serif"> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family: "Times New Roman",serif">On issue two, counsel posited that the claim of the defendant in its counterclaim centers on declaratory order and to recover Toyota Prado Jeep from claimant and to pay N3500 per day from 4<sup>th</sup> September, 2014 till date of judgment the alternatives as well as payment of N10million damages for loss of use. He stated that this court lack the jurisdiction to hear matters of title to property or debt recovery. Continuing counsel contended that the Toyota Prado jeep in question was jointly bought and financed by the claimant and the defendant on the 22<sup>nd</sup> of March 2013 in the sum of N10, 095,000 and that claimant paid an additional N405,000 to balance the Toyota Prado jeep, hence no amount is recoverable from him as alleged or at all rather it is the defendant counterclaimant that is indebted to claimant on all unpaid severance benefit which is being detained till date.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family: "Times New Roman",serif"> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family: "Times New Roman",serif">It is counsel submission that the claimant tendered the defendant management account for the period ended at 31<sup>st</sup> of August, 2014 showing profit before tax of N11,902,465 out of which claimant was entitled to profit sharing of N600,000 and 2014 performance inducement pay 2014 N1,250,000 which had been contractually agreed upon as payable to the claimant. He also submitted that the defendant failed to tender its published audited account to suppress the facts of claimant entitlement to profit sharing and it also failed to deny the statement of account for the period under reviewed. He stated that from the totality of evidence of the claimant, he is entitled to payment of his severance benefit of N65,662,521.82 which had remain unpaid despite repeated demand by claimant as well as interest at 15% and cost of action. He urged the court to so hold.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family: "Times New Roman",serif"> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family: "Times New Roman",serif">The defendant in its reply on point of law filed on 25<sup>th</sup> of November, 2016 submitted that both exhibit CS3 the board paper titled “remuneration package†and 12 the staff hand book heavily relied on by claimant have no evidential value to the defendant as both exhibits were wrongly admitted. He cited the case <b>Abolarin v Ogundele [2012] 10 NWLR (Pt 1308) at p. 253.</b>Counsel urged the court to expunge same and discountenance its content in its judgment. Counsel urged the court on exhibit CS1 to interpret the said exhibit in line with pleading and that the staff handbook did not exist at the time of exhibit CS1 and that it was the clamant himself that presided over the committee for the production of the handbook that was never approved. Counsel also urged the court to engage the golden rule in interpreting exhibit CS1 as the literal rule will lead to absurdity.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family: "Times New Roman",serif"> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family: "Times New Roman",serif">Upon a careful perusal of the processes filed, the oral evidence of both witnesses, the documents tendered, the written addresses of both counsel and authorities cited in support. It is in the considered view of the court that the issues for the court’s determination are<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-add-space:auto;text-align:justify;text-indent:-18.0pt;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo3"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"">1.<span style="font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-family: 'Times New Roman';"> </span></span><!--[endif]--><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Whether or not claimant has proven his case to be so entitled.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoListParagraphCxSpLast" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-add-space:auto;text-align:justify;text-indent:-18.0pt;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo3"><!--[if !supportLists]--><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman"">2.<span style="font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-family: 'Times New Roman';"> </span></span><!--[endif]--><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Whether or not the defendant/counterclaimant is entitled to its claim.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family: "Times New Roman",serif"> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family: "Times New Roman",serif"> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family: "Times New Roman",serif">It is pertinent to sort out a germane issue that arose in the course of trail, for which the learned defence counsel by his paragraph 4.14 of his final written address filed on behalf of the defendant quoted and urged the court to discountenance the evidence of the claimant as it is not in the legitimate practice of the defendant. It is on record of this case that the claimant on the 18th of January, 2016, whilst giving evidence under cross examination, when the defence counsel asked him to tell the court the reason<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family: "Times New Roman",serif">for his retirement. He stated as quoted supra by the defence counsel in his final written address thus- <b>“I voluntarily sent my retirement notice because on 28/6/13, I was asked by MD to retrench staff as they were not paid benefit. I was asked by Mekunye to lie against the staff in court. I refused. When Mekunye on 16/9/14 sent me to come to NIC to testify. I elected to go to head office and submitted my letter of resignation". </b>It is in consequence of this and in compliance with the position of the law that where such an allegation is made against a party, the court in the interest of justice and fair hearing is to give the person concerned an opportunity to come and clear his name as was conceded by both counsel in this case, that the court ordered for the issuance and service of a subpoena ad testificandum on the said Dr. Mekwunye to appear in court to state his own side of the story and particularly as counsel to clear his name of this weighty allegation against him. It is noteworthy, that instead of Dr. Mekwunye to comply with the order of this court, he chose to shy away from it by judicial process urging the court to strike out its subpoena. The court considered his application on merit and ruled on it dismissing his application. I adopt this court's ruling of 25th October, 2016 in that regard. It became obvious that Dr. Mekwunye do not intend to avail himself the opportunity of a fair hearing. As the law is trite as evinced in plethora of case law authorities, that a party as a matter of law should be allowed to put forward his side of the case for the court to consider, however, that notwithstanding, a party/person cannot and should not complain of breach of fair hearing where he refused to avail himself of the opportunity to be heard as in this case. ( In relation to Dr. Mekwunye). See <b>Alhaji Auwalu Darma V. Eco bank Nig Ltd. Suit No, SC.20/2005. delivered by the apex court in February, 2017</b>. This court is left with no choice by the scenario painted supra, than to find from the only fact on record that the statement made by the CW on oath is the true position of what transpired between him and Dr. Mekwunye, thereby leading to his abrupt retirement from the services of the defendant. I so find and hold. <b><o:p></o:p></b></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify"><b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"> </span></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify"><b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"> </span></b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size: 14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Now to the merit of the case it is not in contention that the claimant vide a letter dated 16<sup>th</sup> of June, 2014 informed the defendant of his intention to voluntarily resign his employment with effect from 15<sup>th</sup> of September, 2014. The only area of divergence is according to the defendant that the claimant is not entitled to his claims in the sum of N65,662,521.82 as he had been paid the sum of N1,754,820.00. The defendant also denied the existence of Exhibit CS7 the basis upon which the claimant calculated his entitlement stating that Afribank Registrars Limited Staff Handbook does not exist. It is the averment of the defendant that the claimant informed the Board of Directors on the 11<sup>th</sup> December, 2013 that the staff Handbook he now rely on in his statement of fact is unlawful and had been withdrawn. A careful perusal of Exhibit OA2 an internal memo from the claimant to the Chairman, Board of Directors of Mainstreet Bank Registrars Limited dated 20<sup>th</sup> December, 2013 intimating the Chairman of the action points from the Board meeting held on the 11<sup>th</sup> of December, 2013 reveals at page 4 of exhibit OA2 that;<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify"><b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"> </span></b></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify"><b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"AR BLANCA";mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman""> </span></b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"AR BLANCA"; mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman"">The board directed that the circulated staff handbook be withdrawn as it was never approved by the Board. The issue of gratuity and that terminal benefits would be harmonized within the group†<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family: "AR BLANCA";mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman""> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family: "Times New Roman",serif">He also informed the Chairman that -</span><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"AR BLANCA"; mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman""> “the circulated handbooks have been withdrawn from the sitting staff. That of exited staff has been very difficult to retrieveâ€<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Now the pertinent question that arises here is, will it be right to hold that the defendant's staff Handbook exhibit CS7 is not known to the defendant as alleged? It is on record that the defendant's Board of Directors held its Board meeting on the 11th of December, 2013, i.e. exhibit OA3, where the Company Secretary informed the board that the Company's Staff Handbook was never brought to the Board for approval from the record of the Directors proceedings. The Board at page 13 of the minute of that meeting exhibit OA3, recommended that management should fast track the review of the complaint for effective resolution, The Board agreed that the Group Staff Hand book should be adopted in all subsidiaries to prevent possible disagreement in computation methodology. Howbeit, there is nothing in the minutes tendered by the defendant to evince that the Board directed the retrieval of the staff Hand book. It is evident from both the report made by the Company Secretary and the Board's resolution in response to it, vis-a-vis the memo sent by the claimant to the Chairman of the Board vide exhibit OA2, wherein he stated as captured supra that the circulated Handbook was retrieved only from the sitting staff but not retrieved from the exited staff, that there was a staff Hand book circulated to the staff of the defendant long before the meeting of the Board of 11th December, 2013, but same was retrieved from the existing staff of the defendant and not from the staff rendered redundant by the defendant as shown by exhibit OA3. It is the defendant's contention that the Board never approved the staff Hand book. However, the erstwhile Managing Director of the defendant C.O. Ukandu, who signed claimant's letter of offer of employment i.e. exhibit CS, exhibit CS1, Claimant's review of salary, Board paper on remuneration package for staff, i.e. exhibit CS2, he equally signed exhibit CS3, i.e. an internal mail sent to the claimant by the same C.O. Ukandu, stated in Suit No NICN/ <b>/LA/335/2013, Mr. Chester Onyemaechie Ukandu v. Mainstreet Bank Registrars Limited, a </b>Judgment of this court delivered on 27th May, 2015<b>, </b>where the defendant equally denied the Staff Hand book,the court held thus<b>-- <o:p></o:p></b></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify"><b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"> </span></b><span class="apple-style-span"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height: 115%;font-family:"AR BLANCA";mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman"">The claimant stated in evidence that the handbook was approved by the defendant's board of directors at the meeting of 13/9/06 and partly approved by management and that the compilation of same is a management function. On a closer look at exhibit CU9, i.e. the minute of meeting of 13/9/06 made reference to staff remuneration package and benefits at paragraphs 8.01 and 8.02 and appendix (i) and (ii) all evince that the content of the handbook are issues already discussed and approved by the board of directors of the defendant. The defendant's company secretary, i.e. DW1 Mr. Adetayo Ogunbanjo admitted under cross examination that the defendant's board approved remuneration and certain structure of the defendant at its meeting of 13/9/06. DW1 also admitted that 13 months salary paid to defendant's staff was approved by the board as bonus, which he equally agreed to be at paragraph 4.5 of the staff handbook. I agree with the claimant who was the Managing Director of the defendant at the time the handbook was compiled, that it is a management function to produce a handbook based on an approved terms by the board of directors. It is also on record that the claimant's appointment letter referred to other conditions of service.</span></span><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt; line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"><o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify;line-height:115%"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify;line-height:115%"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">It is obvious from the decision of this court in Chester O. Ukandu's case supra and the sister cases of <b>Mrs. Kehinde Abimbola v Mainstreet Bank Registrars Unreported Suit No NICN/LA/517/2013 a judgment delivered on the 27th of May, 2015; Awe Olugbenga V. Mainstreet Registrars Ltd, Suit No NIC/LA/515/2013, a judgment delivered on 30th September, 2015; Inowan Benson V. Mainstreet Registrars Ltd, Suit No NIC/LA/421/2013, a judgment delivered on 25th November, 2016 and Godspower Julius Imonike V. Mainstreet Registrars Ltd, Suit No NIC/LA/518, a judgment delivered on 12th July, 2016, AmusaWasiuOlawale v. Mainstreet Bank Registrars Limited Suit no: </b></span><b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family: "Times New Roman",serif;mso-bidi-language:HE">NICN/LA/511/2013, a judgment delivered on the 15<sup>th</sup> of May, 2017. </span></b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">In all these cases where the MD/CEO Chester Ukandu testified as a subpoenaed witness CW2, he reiterated his statement as captured in Chester Ukandu's case, supra, that he got the Board's approval for all the terms contained in the staff Handbook and pertinent portions were corroborated by the Company Secretary one Adetayo Ogunbanjo. Also DW confirmed in his testimony on oath that Chester Ukandu was the pioneer and erstwhile MD/CEO of the defendant. DW equally stated on oath that claimant's letter of employment referred to the defendant's staff Handbook but alleged that he did not see any staff Handbook when he resumed as the Acting MD of the defendant. It is the law that in a claim for terminal benefit, a claimant who is making a claim under the contract of service is to tender before the court his contract of employment for which he is making a claim. The claimant in this case has tendered his letter of employment wherein it was stated at the second to the last paragraph thus --<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify;line-height:115%"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"> <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify;line-height:115%"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"AR BLANCA"; mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman""> Your appointment shall be governed by the Company's policies and procedures as contained in the staff Hand book as may be amended from time to time.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify;line-height:115%"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify;line-height:115%"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Assuming but not conceding to the fact that exhibit CS7 is not the staff Hand book of the defendant as contended. One then wonders which staff Hand book was referred to in claimant's letter of employment highlighted above and also curious to know where the alleged staff Hand book is, in the light of DW's admission that the defendant has a staff Handbook but not exhibit CS7. He however, failed or refused to tender the staff hand book referred to in claimant's employment letter captured supra. Consequently, I find from all the series of evidence available on record of this court as well as the evidence of the Pioneer MD/CEO of the defendant captured supra, that the claimant has proven that his contract of employment was regulated by both his employment letter and the defendant's staff Hand book, i.e. exhibit CS and CS7 respectively. The onus of proving otherwise shifts on the defendant to produce the Staff Hand book it referred to in claimant's letter of employment. DW on record also failed to show any other staff Handbook as stated earlier in this judgment. It is in the light of all this coupled with the facts and circumstance of this case and the Sister cases of Chester Ukandu supra, of which I take judicial notice that I find that exhibit CS7, i.e. the defendant's staff Hand book and his employment letter regulated his contractual relationship with the defendant. Accordingly, I discountenanced the argument of the defendant. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify;line-height:115%"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify;line-height:115%"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Having held that exhibit CS7 is the defendant’s staff handbook which regulates the employment of both the claimant and the defendant, a germane question to determine is whether the claimant is then entitled to his claims under the exhibit CS7 or any other document on record. It is important to note that the claimant is by exhibit CS, CS1, i.e. his letters of employment and review of salary respectively dated 15th May, 2008, he is entitled to severance benefits and other allowances as evinced on the documents. It is the claimant’s claim that he is entitled to the sum of N65,662,521.82 which includes:<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family: "Times New Roman",serif">* Gratuity Annual salary plus allowance N63,813,521.00<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family: "Times New Roman",serif">* Profit Sharing for the year 2013 N 600,000.00<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt;text-align: justify"><!--[if gte vml 1]><v:shape id="_x0000_s1029" type="#_x0000_t32" style='position:absolute;left:0;text-align:left;margin-left:318.9pt; margin-top:16.65pt;width:104.25pt;height:0;z-index:251662336' o:connectortype="straight"/><![endif]--><!--[if !vml]--><span style="mso-ignore:vglayout;position:absolute;z-index:251662336;left:0px; margin-left:424px;margin-top:22px;width:141px;height:2px"><img width="141" height="2" src="file:///C:/Users/TEE%20SAM/AppData/Local/Packages/oice_16_974fa576_32c1d314_8c8/AC/Temp/msohtmlclip1/01/clip_image001.gif" v:shapes="_x0000_s1029"></span><!--[endif]--><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size: 14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">* 2014 Performance Inducement Pay (PIP) N 1,250,000.00<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify"><!--[if gte vml 1]><v:shape id="_x0000_s1031" type="#_x0000_t32" style='position:absolute;left:0;text-align:left; margin-left:320.4pt;margin-top:17.65pt;width:104.25pt;height:0;z-index:251664384' o:connectortype="straight"/><![endif]--><!--[if !vml]--><span style="mso-ignore: vglayout;position:absolute;z-index:251664384;left:0px;margin-left:426px; margin-top:23px;width:141px;height:2px"><img width="141" height="2" src="file:///C:/Users/TEE%20SAM/AppData/Local/Packages/oice_16_974fa576_32c1d314_8c8/AC/Temp/msohtmlclip1/01/clip_image003.gif" v:shapes="_x0000_s1031"></span><!--[endif]--><!--[if gte vml 1]><v:shape id="_x0000_s1030" type="#_x0000_t32" style='position:absolute;left:0;text-align:left; margin-left:319.65pt;margin-top:16.15pt;width:104.25pt;height:0;z-index:251663360' o:connectortype="straight"/><![endif]--><!--[if !vml]--><span style="mso-ignore: vglayout;position:absolute;z-index:251663360;left:0px;margin-left:425px; margin-top:21px;width:141px;height:2px"><img width="141" height="2" src="file:///C:/Users/TEE%20SAM/AppData/Local/Packages/oice_16_974fa576_32c1d314_8c8/AC/Temp/msohtmlclip1/01/clip_image003.gif" v:shapes="_x0000_s1030"></span><!--[endif]--><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size: 14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"> <b>N65,662,521.82<o:p></o:p></b></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify;line-height:115%"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif; mso-bidi-language:HE">The defendant averred that the claimant was paid the sum of </span><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family: "Times New Roman",serif">N1,754,820.00 as his terminal benefit at the point of his exit. This assertion the claimant denied under Oath. It is the law that assertions of facts do not, on their own, constitute proof of them. It is one thing to assert and it is another thing to adduce concrete and credible evidence in proof of same. See Section 131 of the Evidence Act, 2011, which is to the effect that he who asserts must prove on the balance of probabilities in civil matters. Pleadings in themselves don't speak unless established/or given flesh to by evidence. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify;line-height:115%"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">A careful review of the evidence before this court shows that the defendant did not by credible evidence prove to the court its assertion that it actually paid to the claimant his terminal benefits as averred. What is before the court is at best vide exhibit OA a notice intimating or advising the claimant of his terminal benefit and nothing more. The defendant failed to tender any evidence of such payment, either by his account statement or a cheque issued for the said payment. It is on this basis that I discountenance the assertion of the defendant as lacking in substance/merit. I so hold.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify;line-height:115%"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify;line-height:115%"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Now, is the claimant entitle to his reliefs sought. He is seeking for gratuity in the sum of N63,813,521.00, Profit Sharing for the year 2013, N600,000.00 and 2014 Performance Inducement Pay (PIP) N1,250,000.00. Paragraph 3.14 and 3.15 of exhibit CS7 states thus;<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify;line-height:115%"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify;line-height:115%"><b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt; line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">“3.14 Mandatory Retirement<o:p></o:p></span></b></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify;line-height:115%"><b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt; line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Employees who attain the age sixty (60) years shall proceed on a mandatory retirement at the company’s discretion. Employment is deemed to terminate on the last day of the notice period. An employee can however go on voluntary or early retirement after attaining the age of 45years and above or at the discretion of management.<o:p></o:p></span></b></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify;line-height:115%"><b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt; line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">3.15 Severance Benefits<o:p></o:p></span></b></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify;line-height:115%"><b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt; line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">The severance benefits payable at the point of exit shall be as follows;<o:p></o:p></span></b></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:36.0pt;text-align:justify;text-indent: -18.0pt;line-height:115%;mso-list:l1 level1 lfo4"><!--[if !supportLists]--><b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt; line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"">a.<span style="font-weight: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-family: 'Times New Roman';"> </span></span></b><!--[endif]--><b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Cash benefits<o:p></o:p></span></b></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:36.0pt;text-align:justify;line-height: 115%"><b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size: 14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Annual basic salary plus all allowances for every year of service up to a limit of five years of service.<o:p></o:p></span></b></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:36.0pt;text-align:justify;line-height: 115%"><b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size: 14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Any part of first year shall be treated as one year while subsequent years shall be prorated including one with more than six months.<o:p></o:p></span></b></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:36.0pt;text-align:justify;text-indent: -18.0pt;line-height:115%;mso-list:l1 level1 lfo4"><!--[if !supportLists]--><b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt; line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"">b.<span style="font-weight: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-family: 'Times New Roman';"> </span></span></b><!--[endif]--><b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Other benefits<o:p></o:p></span></b></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:36.0pt;text-align:justify;line-height: 115%"><b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size: 14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">i. purchase of car under Car ownership scheme <o:p></o:p></span></b></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:36.0pt;text-align:justify;line-height: 115%"><b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size: 14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">staff with company car(s) under Car ownership shall be allowed to purchase the cars at a book value or 10% of original cost (whichever is lower).<o:p></o:p></span></b></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:36.0pt;text-align:justify;line-height: 115%"><b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size: 14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">ii. Loan repayment on outstanding loans<o:p></o:p></span></b></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:36.0pt;text-align:justify;line-height: 115%"><b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size: 14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">50% of all outstanding loans (personal, car and mortgage) shall be deducted from the total value of the severance benefits while the balance shall be paid at an interest rate of 5% par annum for a term to be mutually agreed.<o:p></o:p></span></b></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:36.0pt;text-align:justify;line-height: 115%"><b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size: 14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"> </span></b></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify;line-height:115%"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">It important to state here that the above provision is in all fours with the letter of employment of claimant exhibit CS, which is not in contention. Defendant is not denying this document. It is stated clearly in exhibit CS, under Retirement at the second page of that letter that-<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:36.0pt;text-align:justify;line-height: 115%"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family: "Times New Roman",serif"> <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:36.0pt;text-align:justify;line-height: 115%"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family: "Times New Roman",serif"> </span><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size: 14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"AR BLANCA";mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman"">The mandatory and voluntary retirement age is 60 years and 45 years respectively subject to at least three months notice. Severance benefit is calculated based on your annual basic salary plus all allowances for every year of service to a maximum limit of 5 years <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:36.0pt;text-align:justify;line-height: 115%"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family: "Times New Roman",serif"> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify;line-height:115%"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">First, it is the contention of the defendant that claimant can only retire at age 60 or 45 years as provided for in his letter of employment and that he is also to give 3 months notice before retirement. It is obvious by exhibit CS4 dated 16th June, 2014, that claimant gave the defendant 3 months notice of his intention to retire voluntary. I agree with the claimant that the defendant did not join issues with the claimant in its pleadings in this regard. Hence it cannot at this stage raise the issue of whether or not claimant was 45 years at the time of his retirement. The law is that fact not pleaded goes to no issue. The apex court in <b>Oruwari v. Osler [2012]LPELR-19764SC;</b> restated this elementary position of the law that </span><span class="apple-converted-space"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:#000099"> </span></span><span class="apple-style-span"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height: 115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">parties are bound by their pleadings, that facts not pleaded go to no issue and are bound to be discountenanced and expunged from the record.</span></span><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt; line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"> Howbeit, it is on record that claimant complied with the terms of his contract by giving the defendant 3 months notice of voluntary retirement. Defendant's argument as regards this is discountenanced for lacking in merit. I therefore find and hold that claimant complied with his terms of employment before his exit from the defendant. I so hold.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:36.0pt;text-align:justify;line-height: 115%"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family: "Times New Roman",serif"> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify;line-height:115%"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Now, back to the earlier posed question, was the claimant paid his severance benefit as stipulated in his letter of employment and the staff Hand book? The answer is in the negative, this is in the light of the claimant's contract of employment captured supra. what then is claimant's severance entitlement? In calculating the claimant’s claims, I called in aid exhibit CS1 dated 15<sup>th</sup> May, 2008, which is the claimant's review of salary structure as follows;(the extant salary structure of the claimant on record), this is a letter written to the claimant by the defendant. It is the law of common that parties are bound by their agreement and none of the parties is allowed to resile from it. What more, DW admitted under cross examination that claimant is entitle to Profit sharing and performance allowances as contained in his letter of employment. The law is notorious that facts admitted need no further prove. See <b>Chief D.B Ajibulu v Major General D.O. Ajayi (RTD) [2014] 2 NWLR (Pt.1392) 483 SC; Ugwu & Ors v. Ezeanowai &Ors [2017]LPELR-41888CA.</b> As the defendant in this case failed to prove otherwise that it did not make any profit or pay same to any of its staff. It is in the light of this exhibit and the facts before the court that I find that claimant is entitle to his claim of the sum of N65,662,521.82 as his severance benefit, same having been proved. I so find and hold.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:36.0pt;text-align:justify;line-height: 115%"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family: "Times New Roman",serif"> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify;line-height:115%"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">As regards claimant's claim for pre judgment interest of 15% on the sum claimed. It is the law as provided for by the rules of this court that, this court is not allowed to award pre judgment interest, except interest on a judgment sum. It is in the light of this that I find that claimant's claim for pre judgment interest is discountenanced. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify;line-height:115%"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"> </span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align:justify"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">On issue two, it is defendant counterclaimant claim that the claimant/defendant to counterclaimant purchased a Toyota Prado 2012 Model Jeep for its operations at the cost of N10,095,000.00. Defendant also averred that additional cost in the sum of N3,500.00 per day was incurred to provide alternative mobility vehicle for the new Managing Director/Chief Executive Officer and the Jeep was assigned to the claimant for use only while in its employment and that the Jeep is still in the custody of the defendant to the counterclaim till date. It stated that the intention of the parties at the time the vehicle was purchased was that ownership thereof vests in the defendant until 4 years when the vehicle will be sold to the claimant at depreciated book value. Clearly therefore, joint ownership was not within the contemplation of the parties regardless of the claim of the claimant that he made part payment. In response claimant vide a reply averred that the Toyota Prado Jeep was jointly financed by him and the defendant and that the Board resolved and approved purchase of 2013 Toyota Camry as the official/status car to him. That following the approval, he completed the balance of N405,000 to Elim Motors Nigeria Limited for purchase of the said Toyota Prado Jeep. He further stated that he never absconded with defendant’s car but stated that the Jeep is jointly financed and owned and at determination of his employment, the defendant equity is to be repaid with 10% of the book value. Claimant tendered exhibit CS13, i.e. a letter from the defendant to the claimant intimating him of his terminal benefit in view of his retirement, wherein the defendant stated at paragraph 3, that the official Prado car with the claimant would be net off from the net book value at his exit from his total benefit. The import of which is that the defendant do not intend to retrieve the Prado Jeep, rather they expressed in that letter their intention to deduct the net book value of the car from claimant's terminal benefit. In prove of their assertion the defendant tendered exhibit OA4 dated 22/03/2013 which is the receipt of the Toyota Prado jeep in the sum of N10,095,000. The claimant in prove of his assertion that the purchase of the car was jointly financed by the defendant and him also tendered exhibit CS8 dated 25/03/2008 in the sum of N405,000. This assertion was admitted by the DW wherein he admitted on oath that the claimant added money to purchase the jeep but that is the practice in the defendant's company. A keen perusal of Exhibit CS7 provides at paragraph 3.15(b) severance benefit upon retirement reproduced earlier states as follows;<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:54.0pt;text-align:justify;text-indent: -18.0pt;line-height:115%;mso-list:l2 level1 lfo5"><!--[if !supportLists]--><b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt; line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"">b.<span style="font-weight: normal; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-family: 'Times New Roman';"> </span></span></b><!--[endif]--><b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Other benefits<o:p></o:p></span></b></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:36.0pt;text-align:justify;line-height: 115%"><b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size: 14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">i. purchase of car under Car ownership scheme <o:p></o:p></span></b></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="margin-left:36.0pt;text-align:justify;line-height: 115%"><b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size: 14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">staff with company car(s) under Car ownership shall be allowed to purchase the cars at a book value or 10% of original cost (whichever is lower).<o:p></o:p></span></b></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify;line-height:115%"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">It is the law that where parties have embodied the terms of their contract in a written document, it is binding on the parties and the court cannot vary or determine the terms outside its clear and ordinary meaning. See the case of <b>Kings Planet International v Carson Products West Africa Limited [2014]2 NWLR (Pt 1392) 605. </b> The import of the above stated exhibit CS7 is that the claimant upon retirement is allowed to purchase the car (that is the Toyota Prado Jeep) at a book value or 10% of original cost. It is obvious from the content of exhibit CS13, that the defendant gave credence to the above captured provision of exhibit CS7, when it stated that it will net off the book value of the jeep. It is important to state that the defendant has failed to prove its assertion that it incurs N3,500 daily to provide alternative transport for its acting MD. It has equally failed to prove that it solely paid for the purchase of the Prado Jeep. Again, the defendant is claiming for N10,000,000.00 for detinue. By <b>J.E. Oshevire V. Tripoli Motors [1997]LPELR-1584SC,</b> </span><span class="apple-style-span"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif; color:#000099"> </span></span><span class="apple-style-span"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height: 115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Liability in detinue is the wrongful detention of the plaintiff's chattel by the defendant after the plaintiff has made a demand for its return. Without proof of wrongful detention on the part of the defendant, a claim in detinue cannot arise. A detention is not wrongful unless the defendant's possession is adverse. It is plain in this case that the defendant never at any time demanded for the return of the Prado Jeep from the claimant, rather it has already</span></span><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt; line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"> made up its mind to net off the book value of the jeep from claimant's terminal benefit. It is in this light that I find and hold that defendant's claim for detinue fails in its entirety. It is equally my finding that the defendant’s counterclaimant only succeeds to the extent that it will net off the book value of the Jeep from the claimant's severance benefit. Claimant is entitled to be paid his contribution to the purchase of the car in the sum of N405,000.00. I so find and hold.<b><o:p></o:p></b></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify;line-height:115%"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify;line-height:115%"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">It is in conclusion that I hold that claimant’s relief succeeds- I therefore make the following Orders-<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify;line-height:115%"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">1. That claimant is to be paid the sum of N65,662,521.82 which consist of his severance benefit, Profit Sharing for the year 2013 in the sum of N600,000.00 and 2014 Performance Inducement Pay (PIP) in the sum of N1,250,000.00. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify;line-height:115%"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">2. That defendant's counterclaims only succeeds to the extent that it is to net off from claimant's severance benefit the net book value of the Prado Jeep or 10% value whichever is lower. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify;line-height:115%"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">3. That claimant is to be paid the sum of N405,000.00 he contributed to the purchase of the Prado Jeep. <o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify;line-height:115%"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">4. That defendant's counterclaim for N10M, damages in detinue fails.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify;line-height:115%"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify;line-height:115%"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">5. I award the sum of N100,000.00 as cost to the claimant.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify;line-height:115%"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify;line-height:115%"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">6. All sums awarded is to be paid within 30days of this judgment failing which it is to attract an interest of 15%.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify;line-height:115%"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"> </span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" style="text-align:justify;line-height:115%"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Judgment is accordingly entered.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" align="center" style="text-align:center;line-height:115%"><b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt; line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"> </span></b></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" align="center" style="text-align:center;line-height:115%"><b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt; line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Hon. Justice O.O Oyewumi<o:p></o:p></span></b></p> <p class="MsoNoSpacing" align="center" style="text-align:center;line-height:115%"><b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:14.0pt; line-height:115%;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Presiding Judge<o:p></o:p></span></b></p>