Download PDF
JUDGMENT 1. Introduction & Claims On 14/5/14, the Claimant approached this Court via his General Form of Complaint and sought the following reliefs - 1. A declaration of this court that the Claimant is entitled to the payment of his arrears of salary, overtime and transport as stated in paragraphs 8, 9, 11, 19 and 20 of the statement of claim totally =N=1,545,000.00 (One Million Five Hundred and Forty Five Thousand Naira Only). 2. An order of this Honourable Court compelling the Defendant to pay the Claimant the sum of =N=20,000,000.00 (Twenty Million Naira Only) being compensation for the permanent disability of the Claimant. 3. An order of this court compelling the Defendant to give a copy of the audit report which did not indict the Claimant. 4. An order of this Court compelling the Defendant to pay a general damage of the sum of =N=10,000,000.00 (Ten Million Naira Only) to the Claimant in this suit. 5. The sum of =N=1,000,000.00 (One Million Naira Only) being the cost of instituting this proceedings. The Claimant accompanied his General Form of Complaint with his statement of claim(sic), witness statement on oath, list of witness, list and copies of documents to be relied on at trial. The Defendant entered an appearance and filed its amended statement of defence on 29/10/15 together with all requisite frontloaded processes. 2. Case of the Claimant Claimant opened his case on 27/1/16, testified as CW1, adopted his witness statement on oath dated 14/5/14 as his evidence in chief and tendered 11 documents as exhibits. The documents were admitted in evidence and marked as Exh. C1-Exh. C11. The case of the Claimant, in brief, is that he was employed by the Defendant and involved in an accident in the premise of the Defendant due to the negligence of the Defendant by bringing a trailer driver to drive a diesel truck on the day of the accident on the 28/2/08; that after his discharge from Hospital he went for rehabilitation for six months; that he spent the sum of =N=240,000.00 (Two Hundred and Forty Thousand Naira Only) for the period; that during the period he spent in the hospital was paid half salary; that he is demanding the sum of =N=360,000.00 (Three Hundred and Sixty Thousand Naira Only); that he was issued with a query dated the 20/5/11 to explain missing diesel which query was responded to on same day; that his employment was eventually terminated for no just cause on the 29/8/11; that a panel of enquiry was instituted called Audit Panel which set the Claimant free and absolved him of any wrong doing; that he appealed to the Defendant allow him work from August 2011 to April 2013 and that during this period, the Claimant worked overtime which he was not paid. Under cross examination, the witness stated that he is 50 years Old and holds School Certificate; that he has no vocational skill; that before he joined Defendant he was teaching in a primary school in Edo State; that he is married with children; that he was a Motor boy with the Defendant; that Defendant had more 200 Trucks when he worked with it and drives as well; that Mr. John was the Driver of the vehicle where he sustained injuries; that before the accident Mr. John had never driven him; that the accident occurred in the Loading section of the Defendant; that Mr. John was a Trailer Driver before he was assigned to drive the Truck from Apapa; that according to Mr. John he (Mr. John) did not know what happen; that he was not use to driving Truck but Trailer; that he (Claimant) suddenly found himself under the Truck in the course of the accident; that the Truck was park by cement gate; that there were people around; that the accident happened inside the premises; that immediately an ambulance came and he found himself at Unity Hospital Ikeja; that he does not know if any staff of Defendant had such accident before and that his salary was =N=30,000.00 apart from overtime. Witness added that Dr. Peter treated him at Unity Hospital; that he does know the department that hires staff at Defendant; that at the time of the accident he lived at 7, Abike Laja Ikotun; that before the accident he was living at Ijora Badiya, 7, Gaskiya College Road; that he was in the Hospital for 1 year and 6 months; that the Defendant paid his hospital bills; that was always paid salary twice in month on 12th and 26th; that he was not indicted by any Audit Report; that the Director told him to go back to his duty post; that he took the overtime cards to the Defendant and that he was still working as Motor boy after the accident. 3. Case of the Defendant The Defendant opened its defence on 11/5/16 and called one Afis Oluwadare Ganiyu as its DW1. DW1 adopted his statement on oath made on 29/10/15 as his evidence in chief and tendered 7 documents as exhibits. The documents were admitted in evidence and marked as Exh. D1-Exh.D7.The case of the Defendant, in brief, is that the Claimant’s accident was caused by his own negligence; that the Claimant received his full salaries between March 2008 and September 2010 during which period he was hospitalized; that the Claimant’s employment was terminated on 29/8/11 and he never worked for the Defendant beyond that period; that the sum of =N=203,531.30 (Two Hundred and Three Thousand, Five Hundred and Thirty-One Naira, Thirty Kobo) is due to be paid to the Claimant as a Permanent Disability Benefit in accordance with the terms of the Defendant’s Combined Compensation/Group Personal Accident Insurance Policy with Sterling Assurance Nigeria Limited and that apart from the said sum of =N=203,531.30 (Two Hundred and Three Thousand, Five Hundred and Thirty-One Naira, Thirty Kobo) the Claimant is not entitled to any other benefit or compensation having received full payment of his salaries between March 2008 and September 2010 during which he was hospitalized. Under cross examination, the witness stated that he has been working with Defendant for 2½ years; that he was not with Defendant when the events of this case happened; that he has nothing here to identify myself as Human Resource Manager of Defendant; that he does know if Claimant was given any warning letter; that he is aware that the Claimant was queried; that Claimant’s employment was previously terminated on 4 occasions and he was reemployed. I have driven only automatic vehicle before; that he has never driven manual one; that if given manual vehicle to drive it will be strange to him and that at Defendant both Truck Drivers and Trailer Drivers have the same driving license. Witness added that Mr. Oyedeji was his colleague; that he could not identify Mr. Oyedeji's signature if he sees one; that he is aware Claimant spent about 2 years in the hospital and later went for rehabilitation; that he does not know if Claimant applied for a vehicle to assist him for rehabilitation; that he does not have any document to show that Claimant was overpaid; that ex-staff may be allowed into the premises of Defendant; that the cheque given to the Claimant was a gift; that he saw a picture of the injury sustained by the Claimant and the Defendant has Group Personal Accident Insurance for staff. Defendant also called one Dr. Mathias Shoga as its DW1. The witness adopted his witness deposition made on 12/7/16 as his evidence in chief. Under cross examination DW2 testified that the Claimant was first assessed by a Medical Officer on duty in February 2008 - a subordinate to him; that he could not remember the actual date; that he is a Consultant Orthopedic Surgeon with Unity Hospital; that the injury was mostly on the right leg and loss of skin and muscle of the leg exposed; that but there were no fractures; that Claimant must have stayed for about 3 or 4 months; that Patient continued to be treated as outpatient and that Claimant had his rehabilitation after 4 months of admission in the hospital. 4. Written Submissions At the close of trial and pursuant to a direction from the Court, learned Counsel on either side filed their final written addresses. The 17-page final written address of the Defendant was filed on 20/1/17. In it learned Counsel canvassed the following issues for determination 1. What is the effect of the Claimant’s Reply to Statement of Defence dated 22nd April 2015 in light of the Claimant’s un-adopted Further Witness Statement on Oath deposed on 22nd April, 2015; 2. Is there any evidence before this Honourable Court to sufficiently prove that the Claimant is entitled to reliefs (a), (c) and (e); 3. Whether or not the Claimants demand for =N=20,000,000.00 (Twenty Million Naira) as compensation for permanent disability as claimed in relief (b) of for any other form of compensation is statute barred; 4. Assuming without conceding, and if this honourable court finds that it has the jurisdiction to entertain the Claimant’s Claim for compensation as claimed in Relief (b), what is the proper amount awardable to the Claimant as compensation under the Workmen’s Compensation Act Cap, W6 Laws of the Federation of Nigeria 2004 (the Act”); 5. Whether or not the Claimant can maintain a claim for Relief (b) and Relief (d) simultaneously and if not, which of the reliefs can the Court award to the Claimant; and 6. Whether or not the Court can grant general damages as claimed in Relief (d). The learned Counsel to the Claimant, in reaction, filed a 10-page final written address on 22/5/17 and set down alone issue for determination viz: whether the Claimant is entitled to the reliefs asked for in the statement of claim numbered A to E which shall be dealt with one after the other. Defendant subsequently filed a reply on points of law of 8 pages on 20/7/17. I read and understood all the issues canvassed in the final written addresses of the parties as well as the reply on points of law as filed by the Defendant. I propose to refer to them where necessary in the course of this Judgment. 5. Decision I have patiently read and understood all the processes filed by learned Counsel on either side. I carefully reviewed all the exhibits tendered and admitted in this case and listened attentively to the oral testimonies of the witnesses called at trial and watched their demeanor. Having done all this, from the pleadings and evidence led, I have come to narrow the issues for the just determination of this case down to the following - Whether the Claimant has proved any or all the reliefs sought to be entitled to same. The law imposes an obligation on a party who approaches the Court for judicial intervention to adduce cogent, credible and admissible evidence in support of his/her claims. This is aptly expressed in the common saying that he who asserts must prove same. An exception here is respecting where there is an admission with regard to material facts in which case the need and imperative for proof is dispensed with for facts admitted need no further proof. The Claimant in this case sought 5 main reliefs. The first is for a declaration of this court that he is entitled to the payment of his arrears of salary, overtime and transport as stated in paragraphs 8, 9, 11, 19 and 20 of the statement of claim totally =N=1,545,000.00 (One Million Five Hundred and Forty Five Thousand Naira Only). The paragraphs state thus - ''8. The Claimant avers that when he was discharged from the Unity Hospital maternity Home and industrial clinic Ikeja in September 2010. He was going for check-up twice a week which cost him N5,000 .00 (Five Thousand Naira only) per day for transport since he was picking taxi from his place of abode to Ikeja and back. 9. That this was done six months without the Defendant contributing any money for his transport or provide vehicle to convey him to the Hospital which made him to spend the sum of N240,000 for the period with the break down as follows: a. N5,000 per day, twice a week = N10,000 b. N10,000 per week in a month = N40,000 c. N40,000 per month x 6 month = N240,000 19. The Claimant states that all the overtime that he did were also recorded in the overtime request forms which are hereby pleaded and shall be relied on at the trial. 20. The Claimant avers that the overtime for the which is N15,000 per month from the month of August 2011 to April 2013 was not paid, the Claimant overtime for one year and 9 months is calculated to be N315,000.00 (Three Hundred and Fifteen Thousand Naira only) for 21 months''. In proof of his case generally, the Claimant tendered 11 exhibits. I have had to reproduce the paragraphs of his pleadings referred to by the Claimant for this head of claim. Essentially, this head of claim is for payment of arrears of salary, overtime and transport. This relief is one in the nature of special damages in which case the sum claimed is certain. To be entitled to positive disposition by the Court, the Claimant is expected to specially plead and strictly prove this head of claim. See Ogbonna v. Ogbonna (2014) LPELR-22308(CA). Unfortunately, though the Claimant sought payment to him of arrears of his salary yet Claimant did not provide to the Court reliable and believable information respecting the months in which salary was not paid to him and for which he sought arrears. It is for instance in evidence as led by the Claimant that his employment with the Defendant was terminated by a letter dated 29/8/11. Yet in paragraph 21 of his statement of claim he averred that '' ... he was also not paid his salaries for the 21 months that he worked from August 2011 to April 2013 with a salary of N30,000 per month which calculated to be ...''. Did the Defendant withdraw the said letter terminating the employment of the Claimant? Or was the Claimant given fresh employment after the termination of his employment by the Defendant? The absence of such information makes it impossible for this Court to order payment of any arrears of salary to be paid by the Defendant to the Claimant. Secondly, the Claimant also sought payment of overtime to him. Again, this is in the nature of special damages which the law requires special pleading and strict proof. See Arabambi v. Advance Beverages Industries Ltd (2005) 19 NWLR (Pt 959) 1, Vinz International Nigeria Ltd v. Morohundiya (2009) 11 NWLR (Pt 1153) 562, Adim v. Nigerian Bottling Co. Ltd, (2010) 9 NWLR (Pt 1200) 543. In support of this head of claim, the Claimant tendered Exh. C7 & Exh. C10. While the former is alleged Defendant's Overtime Card the latter is Defendant's alleged Overtime Request Form. Again while the former is for the period 11/11/11 to 27/11/11 the latter is for the period 6/4/12 to 9/4/12. I carefully perused these exhibits. I note that though alleged to refer to overtime entitlement of the Claimant, no mention was made of the amount due to the Claimant in any of the two exhibits. How then did the Claimant arrive at the figure claimed? The answer to that question is not obvious from both the pleadings filed and evidence led by the Claimant. Aside from this, the Claimant while testifying in chief informed the Court his employment was terminated by a letter dated 29/8/11. See paragraph 15 of the Claimant's statement on oath dated 14/5/14 and adopted as evidence in chief. Unfortunately, the Claimant did not inform the Court how he came about performing overtime for the Defendant in 2012 as shown by Exh. C10. I find that the evidence led by the Claimant did not support this relief. I thus refuse this head of claim for lack of proof as required. The payment sought for expenses incurred for transport. I find the evidence led in support of this relief not sufficiently cogent and credible enough to warrant a grant of same. The relief 1 as sought by the Claimant is here refused and dismissed for lack of proof by evidence. The second relief sought is for an order of this Honourable Court compelling the Defendant to pay the Claimant the sum of =N=20,000,000.00 (Twenty Million Naira Only) being compensation for the permanent disability of the Claimant. A claim for compensation for permanent disability is one bothering on negligence. In the case of Osadebay v. Ikejiofor (2001) 8 NWLR (pt. 714) page 164 of 170 the Court per Ba'aba JCA stated that ''... negligence is a question of fact not law, and it is a duty on he who asserts it to prove it, and unless the plaintiff is able to produce satisfactory evidence that the fire incident was cause by the defendant's negligence, it is the duty of the trial court to dismiss the action and enter judgment for the defendant. Mere occurrence of an accident such as the fire incident in the instant case is not proof of negligence. See Ngilari v. Mother Cat Ltd. (1999) 13 NWLP (Pt. 636) 626. A Plaintiff seeking relief in negligence therefore must plead such acts of negligence and prove same by adducing cogent and reliable evidence in support of the particulars of the negligent act alleged. See the authorities in the case of UTB (Nig) Ltd. v. Ozoemera (2001) 7 NWLR (Pt. 713) 718 at 733-734, Seismograph Services Ltd. v. Mark (1993) 7 NWLR (Pt. 314) 203 at 218 and Onogwuwah v. Jamb (2001) 10 NWLR (Pt.722) 742 at 755 -756. For the Claimant to succeed in this head of claim, the burden is on him to prove that the Defendant owed him a duty of care; that the Defendant breached that duty of care and that damages resulted to him by that breach of duty of care. It is settled law that an employer is under an obligation to take reasonable care for the safety of his workmen in the course of their employment. See Kabo Air Limited v. Mohammed (2014) LPELR-23614(CA) & Wilsons and Clyde Coal Co. Limited v. English (1938) AC 57 at 84. Thus, it is suffice to hold that the Defendant in this case owes the Claimant a duty of care. I also find from the pleadings of the Claimant that of a truth that the Claimant sustained injury in the course of his employment with the Defendant. However, it is for the Claimant to further prove that the Defendant breached its duty of care. Unfortunately, that important element has not been proved here. Indeed, the Defendant in paragraph 6 of its amended statement of defence dated and filed on 29/10/15 averred that the accident in which the Claimant was involved was caused by the Claimant's own negligence; that the Claimant attempted to jump onto a moving vehicle on the premises of the Defendant; that the Claimant should have known that jumping into a moving vehicle was reckless and dangerous; and that the Claimant did not exercise due care required of a reasonable man. These averments were not in any way or manner controverted or challenged by the Claimant even though the Claimant had opportunity to do so. It is unfortunate that the Claimant sustained injury in the course of his employment with the Defendant and in the premises of the Defendant. Unfortunately, the Claimant has not successfully hanged the accident and the injury he sustained from same on the Defendant. I hold that the Claimant has failed to discharge the burden on him to be entitled to this relief as sought. I therefore refuse and dismiss same for lack of proof. The third relief sought by the Claimant is for an order of this Court compelling the Defendant to give a copy of the audit report which did not indict the Claimant. The Claimant asserts the existence of an Audit Report. It is also the assertion of the Claimant that the said report did not indict him. Without much ado, it is trite that he who asserts must prove. I am in total agreement with learned Counsel to the Defendant that the Defendant having failed to produce the said Audit Report despite Notice to Produce issued by the Claimant, the Claimant was entitled to produce any copy of the report he alleged existed. That was the step the Claimant ought to have taken if really sure of the existence of the Audit Report. See Chemiron Int. Limited v. Egbujunuma (2007)All FWLR (Pt. 395) & Abubakar v. Waziri (2008)14 NWLR (Pt. 1108) 507. I refuse to grant this relief. I accordingly dismiss same. The 4th relief sought is for an order of this Court compelling the Defendant to pay a general damage of the sum of =N=10,000,000.00 (Ten Million Naira Only) to the Claimant in this suit. General damages are said to flow naturally from the wrongful act of a Defendant. See Owena Mass Transportation Company Limited v. Imafidon (2011) LPELR-4810(CA). To succeed a Claimant is not required to strictly prove same as in the case of special damages. It is sufficient that some wrong has been attributed to the Defendant. From the review of this case, the pleadings and evidence led, the Claimant has not succeeded in placing any wrong at the door steps of the Defendant. General damages will not lie in the absence of any wrong committed by or attributed to the Defendant. I hold that the Defendant is not liable in general damages to the Claimant. Finally the Claimant sought payment of the sum of =N=1,000,000.00 (One Million Naira Only) being the cost of instituting this proceedings. The need for cost is usually to compensate a party who has won in Court respecting some reasonable expenses. Thus far the Claimant has not led credible evidence in support of any of his claims in this Court. I hold that there is no basis for award of general damages as sought by the Claimant. Before I draw a curtain on this Judgment I am inclined to draw attention to the evidence in chief of the DW1 and in particular paragraph 17 of the witness statement on oath made on 29/10/15 to the effect that - ''The Defendant does not owe the Claimant any entitlement. However, the sum of =N=203,531.30 (Two Hundred and Three Thousand, Five Hundred and Thirty- One Naira, Thirty Kobo) is due to be paid to the Claimant as a Permanent Disability Benefit in accordance with the terms of the Defendant's Combined Compensation/Group Personal Accident Insurance Policy with Sterling Assurance Nigeria Limited''. Pursuant to the above admission by the Defendant, the Defendant is here ordered to pay to the Claimant the sum of Two Hundred and Three Thousand, Five Hundred and Thirty-One Naira and Thirty Kobo only as admitted due to the Claimant as permanent disability benefit. Finally, for the avoidance of doubt and for all the reasons as contained in this Judgment, the case of the Claimant is dismissed in its entirety. The Defendant is however ordered to pay to the Claimant the sum of Two Hundred and Three Thousand, Five Hundred and Thirty-One Naira and Thirty Kobo only as admitted due to the Claimant as permanent disability benefit. I make no order as to cost. Judgment is entered accordingly. ____________________ Hon. Justice J. D. Peters Presiding Judge