Download PDF
JUDGMENT 1. Introduction, Claims & Counter claims On 24/2/15, the Claimant approached this Court by his General Form of Complaint and sought the following reliefs - 1. All the Claimant’s entitlement bonus from the year 2012 – 2014 at the tune of =N=2,265,227.1 interest rate at 21% per annum from 24th October 2011 till the judgment date and thereafter at the same rate until final payment of the judgment debt and cost. 2. Claimant’s salary for the month of August 2014 at the tune of =N=40,000.00 interest rate at 21% per annum from 31st August, 2014 till the judgment date and thereafter at the same rate until the full and final payment of the judgment debt and cost. 3. General damages of the sum of Ten Million Naira (=N=10,000,000.00) for the pain/suffering and loss by the Claimant occasioned by the unlawful and wrongful deprivation of the Claimant’s entitlement/bonus and benefits which funds were withheld from Claimant and utilized by the Defendant for its day to day business. 4. And for such other or further reliefs as may be incidental and convenient in the circumstances. The Claimant's Form 1 was accompanied with all requisite frontloaded processes. The Defendant entered its appearance, filed a Statement of Defence and Counter-claim with exhibits attached to same, List of Witness, Witness Statement on Oath and List of Documents to be relied upon at the Trial of this suit all dated 16/3/15. The Defendant counter claimed for the sum of =N=715,000 and interest thereon from 13th August, 2013 until final liquidation. 2. Claimant's case The hearing of this case commenced on 2/11/15 when the Claimant opened its case and testified as CW1. CW1 adopted his witness statement on oath dated 24/2/15 as his evidence in chief and tendered 12 documents to be admitted as exhibits. The documents were admitted and marked as Exh. C1 - Exh. C12. The case of the Claimant, in brief, is that he was employed by the Defendant as a sale staff sometime in November 2011; that he given an oral promise that he would be paid bonuses for sales made; that he sold some goods of the Defendant on credit to some customers and that the Defendant did not keep its oral promise respecting the payment of bonus; that he eventually resigned his appointment with the Defendant and sought to be paid his sales bonuses. Under cross examination, CW1 stated that he does not know if bonuses are paid in all the Departments; that he was informed at the tail end of his stay that sales bonus would longer be paid; that he served his reports on the Defendant; that he made demands for his bonus; that the means of communication was e-mail; that he was not asked to show documents for his bonuses and that there was no written proof on sales bonus except the emails he sent. Witness added that he worked almost 3 years with Defendant; that he was never queried at all; that he resigned in July and it was accepted in August; that the Defendant did not accept his resignation; that he gave a month notice; that he had not cleared or recovered all outstanding monies due to the Defendant before he resigned; that he did not introduce Mr. Tony Peace to his Supervisor and colleague; that he sold goods to Mr. Tony Peace on credit; that he could not remember the year he started selling on credit to Tony Peace; that the credit sales to Mr. Tony Peace was approved by his Head of Department; that Mr. Tony Peace was not known by his Supervisor and Head of Department and that the credit sales were approved. It was also the evidence of CW1 under cross examination that he was queried to recover the debts; that he was told to recover the debts in 2014; that goods were supplied to Mr. Tony Peace while Waybill for the goods was in the name of those entitled to the credit; that he was never queried about the manner or supply of goods to Mr. Tony Peace; that he cannot remember of any pending investigation before he resigned; that the debt of Mr. Tony Peace was about =N=715,000.00 and that he did not recover the debt before he resigned. 3. Defendant's case The Defendant opened its defence on 24/5/15 and called one Shola Olaogun as its DW1. The witness adopted his witness statement on oath dated 17/3/15 as his evidence in chief and tendered 13 documents for admission as exhibits. The documents were so admitted and marked as Exh. D1-Exh. D13. The case for the Defendant is that apart from =N=35,000.00 communicated by the Defendant to the Claimant as his gross remuneration, the Defendant did not promise to pay the Claimant any sales bonuses as alleged by the Claimant; that sometime in 2012, the Claimant started making spurious claims for sales bonus upon which he was rightly informed that the Defendant does not pay sales bonuses; that sometime in February, 2014, the Defendant discovered that the Claimant had been selling the Defendant’s goods to a faceless customer by the name Mr. Tony Peace and concealed the transactions by using the names of other customers; that by the Defendant’s policies before a sales man can sell goods on credit to any customer he must seek approval and the credit sales must be duly authorized by the Defendant’s Head of department and Supervisor but in this instant case the Claimant never sought and obtained the Defendant’s approval; that the Claimant between 2013 - 2014 sold the Defendant’s goods worth over =N=4,457,000.00 leaving an outstanding balance of =N=715,000.00; that while the debt of Mr. Tony Peace was being investigated by the Defendant, the Claimant tendered his resignation letter to the Defendant on the 9th July 2014 without giving any notice; that notwithstanding, the Defendant required that the Claimant to do a proper clarification and handover to his Manager in line with the Defendant’s policies before the Claimant final release; that the Claimant subsequently demanded for his salary for August upon which the Defendant rightly told the Claimant to confirm the days he was present at work before he would be paid but the Claimant, failed, refused and/or neglected to comply with Exh. D11. Under cross examination, the witness testified that his duty at the Defendant is to manage human resources of Defendant; that he has been with Defendant for 23 years; that when Claimant was employed he was in the Human Resources Department; that he knows the Claimant; that he was not privy to discussion that took place between Claimant and his Supervisors when he was employed; that he was not aware of exchange of correspondence between Claimant and his Supervisor; that the Claimant was earning =N=35,000 per month; that he is aware of his job details; that the Claimant was a Sales Representative of Defendant; that he does not know how much he was making for Defendant annually; that the Defendant does not pay bonuses; that the Defendant has never paid bonuses and that bonuses are not in the Defendant's contract. DW1 added that the Defendant offers credit facilities; that Heads of Department set targets for Sales Representatives; that he does not know how much target was given to Claimant; that staff of Defendant are to work for Defendant; that he has no proof that Claimant recovered the sum of =N=715,000.00 from Mr. Tony Peace; that the Defendant did not deceive the Claimant at the point of employment and the contract of employment was clear on terms; that the Defendant did not at any time increase the salary of the Claimant and that the Defendant increases salary of staff every 2years and are informed in writing. 4. Submissions on Behalf of the Defendant At the close of trial, learned Counsel on either side filed their final written addresses. The final written address of the Defendant was dated 22/6/16 and filed on 24/6/16. In it, learned Counsel set down the following 5 issues for determination - 1. Whether or not the Claimant by its pleadings, evidence and exhibits is entitled to bonus payment from year 2012 to 2014. 2. Whether or not the Claimant is entitled to the claim for salary for the month of August 2014. 3. Whether or not the Claimant is entitled to the General Damages of =N=10,000,000.00 as claimed for deprivation of entitlement and bonus. 4. Whether or not the Defendant is entitled to its counter claim in the sum of =N=715,000.00 and interest thereon from 13/8/13 until final liquidation. 5. Whether or not the Defendant is entitled to cost. Arguing issue 1, learned Counsel submitted that the burden is on the Claimant to prove the terms of his contract of employment citing Nwokoma v. First Bank of Nigeria Plc (2014)50 NLLR (Pt. 166) 357. Counsel submitted that on the evidence led the Claimant has not proved his entitlement to sales bonus as he claimed; Exh. C8 is an unsigned and undated document which ought to be expunged from the proceedings and that the Court should so hold. On issue 2 Counsel submitted that the Claimant gave no evidence to prove his entitlement to salary for the month of August 2014 and that the Claimant failed to comply with the Defendant's procedure for payment. Counsel urged the Court to so hold and resolve this issue in favor of the Defendant. Respecting issue 3, learned Counsel submitted that the Claimant's claims for bonus sales and salaries for August 2014 upon which the claim for general damages is hinged are vague, speculative in nature and totally lacking in evidence and that same cannot stand. Counsel cited Gbenga & Ors. v. Total Data Limited (2015)51 NLLR (Pt. 172) 696. On whether or not the Defendant is entitled to its counter claim in the sum of =N=175,000.00 and interest from 13/8/13 until liquidation, Counsel referred to the evidence of DW1 and Exh. D4 & Exh. D5; that it was the entire decision of the Claimant to sell good on credit to Mr. Tone Peace and that the Claimant admitted under cross examination that he had not recovered the debt. Counsel prayed the Court to grant this counter claim. On interest at the rate of 21% learned Counsel cited UBA Plc v. Oranuba (2014)47 NLLR (Pt. 154) 470 and submitted that Claimant being an employee of the Defendant there existed a fiduciary relationship between them to make the Court award interest sought. On issue of cost, learned Counsel submitted citing ACB Limited v. Ajugo (2012)6 NWLR (Pt. 1295) 97 that cost follows event. Counsel thus prayed the Court to award cost of the proceedings to the Defendant. 5. Submissions on Behalf of the Claimant In his final written address filed on 16/9/16, learned Counsel to the Claimant canvassed the following issues for determination - 1. Whether the Claimant has proved his case particularly regarding implied Contract to be entitled to his claim as per his General Form of Complaint. 2. Whether the evidence of the Defendant’s witness (DW1) is credible enough to be relied on by this honourable court and whether it is sufficient. 3. Whether the Defendant is entitled to its counter-claim in the sum of =N=715,000 and interest thereon from 13th August, 2013 until final liquidation. 4. Whether the Claimant is entitled to the awarding of general damages in the sum of =N=10,000,000.00. 5. Whether the Claimant is entitled to his salary for the month of August, 2014. On issue 1 learned Counsel submitted that there existed an implied contract between the Claimant and his superiors regarding the issue of bonus citing UTC (Nig.) Plc v. Philips (2012)6 NWLR (Pt. 1295) 180; that the demand of the Managing Director of the Defendant and Mr. Dinesh for official written proof of sales bonus from the Claimant is evidence of promise to pay bonus; that there were circumstances that raised the presumption that the Claimant would to the knowledge of his superiors expect to be paid bonus considering the nature of his job and failure of the Defendant to reply the e-mails sent constitutes acceptance citing Despan v. Mangu Local Government Council (2013)2 NWLR (Pt. 1338) 203 at 232. Counsel urged the Court to consider all the exhibits tendered and give Judgment in favor of the Claimant. On issue 2, learned Counsel submitted that there were inconsistencies in the testimony on oath of DW and his testimonies under cross examination; that DW stated on oath that he is the Administration & Personnel Manager of the Defendant but that under cross examination he claimed to be Head of Human Resources; that DW also stated that when Claimant was employed on 4/11/11 he was the Head of Human Resources while according to learned Counsel when the Claimant was employed the Personnel Manager was one Mr. Ajayi N.O. Counsel submitted citing Baruga v. State (1996)7 NWLR (Pt. 460) 274 that the witness is not a credible witness. Counsel submitted further that ''the Defendant failed to call the Claimant's superiors who discussed the issues of bonus with him and this amounts to withholding of evidence because participation of the Claimant's Superiors who represented the Defendant during the employment of the Claimant was conspicuous through the exhibits tendered by the Claimant in this suit''. Counsel cited S. 20 & S. 122(2), Evidence Act, 2011. On the Defendant's counter claim, Counsel submitted that he who asserts must prove citing Odutemu v. Jomoy Depot Services Limited & Anor. (2014)42 NLLR (Pt. 132) 588; that for one to rely on fraud in any case, he must first and foremost specifically plead same and in addition supply particulars of the alleged fraud so as not to take the other party by surprise, citing Ezenwa v. Oko & Ors. (2008) vol. 157 LRCN. Counsel submitted that the Defendant has not proved any fraud against the Claimant; that there is no evidence of any investigation carried by the Defendant regarding Mr. Tony Peace; that the Claimant was not invited to any such investigation and that there is no evidence before the Court evidencing its claim of an investigation that indicted the Claimant or evidence of its discovery that the Claimant had recovered the outstanding sum of =N=715,000.00 owed by Mr. Tony Peace. Counsel prayed the Court to so hold. Finally, on whether the Claimant is entitled to his salary for the month of August 2014, Counsel submitted that the Claimant is entitled to his salary as claimed; that the Claimant fulfilled the Defendant's policy of one month in lieu of notice; that by Exh. C9 the Claimant tendered his resignation via a mail; that he resigned on 9/7/14 and that the Claimant continued to work for one month and two weeks in order to satisfy the Company's policy. He urged the Court to grant this prayer. The Defendant subsequently filed a 4-page reply on points of law on 26/9/16. 6. Decision I have read all the processes filed by learned Counsel on either side. I reviewed and evaluated all the exhibits tendered. In addition I listened to the testimonies of the witness called at trial and carefully watched their demeanor. Having done this, I narrow the issues for the just determination of this case down to the following - 1. Whether the Claimant has proved his case to be entitled to all or some of the reliefs sought. 2. Whether the Defendant has proved its counter claim to be entitled to same. In any employment relationship especially where there is a written contract, the contract document defines the terms and conditions of the relationship. The same written contract outlines the rights, obligations and liabilities of the parties under and in relation to same. In event of dispute arising between the parties therefore and judicial intervention is sought, the duty of the Court is limited simply to the construction of the contract document existing between the parties. See Okogie & Ors. Epoyun (2010) LPELR-9145 (CA).It is not for the Court to re-write contract for the parties, see Nwaolisa v. Nwabufo (2011) LPELR-2115 (CA)' and neither is it within the power of the Court to give to a party rights or benefits not available to it under the contractual terms and conditions applicable to the parties. In the instant case, Exh. D1 is the evidence of contract entered into by the parties in this case. I examined the 4-page document. There is nothing in that exhibit either directly or indirectly touching on the entitlement of the Claimant to Bonus in whatever form of guise. I so find and so hold. Now, the Claimant had urged the Court to hold that there exists an implied term of his entitlement to Bonus in the contract between him and the Defendant. Usually the need to resort to any implied terms of contract will arise where there is a lacunae in the contract document and the terms and conditions contained in it. In much the same vein, the facts of the case and the surrounding circumstances will be of immense assistance in finding what any implied term may be. The facts of this case and its surrounding circumstances do not convey any intention on the part of the parties for any implied terms to be imputed into their contract. Exh. D1 - letter of Contract contains detailed provisions respecting commencement and validity of contract, Place of work, Remuneration as well as Responsibilities. If Bonus were to be an issue it would no doubt have been contained in the contract. Interestingly, aside from assertions of the Claimant and the diverse e-mail messages sent by him to the Defendant's officers, there is no other evidence in support of the existence of oral promise respecting Bonus to be paid to the Claimant. Indeed, the Claimant attested to this in the course of cross examination. I read part of the submissions of learned Counsel to the Claimant that the Defendant ought to have called the superiors of the Claimant who made promise of Bonus to him at trial. Unfortunately, that line of argument will not come in aid of the Claimant. The law remains as trite as ever that he who asserts must prove the assertions. See Intercontinental Bank Plc v. Dayekh Brothers Limited (2014) LPELR-23485 (CA). It is not for the Defendant to prove anything except where it has a counter claim. A Defendant may therefore properly elect not to lead evidence or call witnesses in his defence or even cross examine any witness called by the Claimant. Indeed, a party to a suit be a Claimant or Defendant cannot be compelled to call a witness, a particular witness or any number of witnesses in proof of its case. It is for the Claimant who has the burden of proof to discharge in order to succeed who must take steps to call any witness whose evidence it considers important to the success of its case. Now, as part of the evidence in proof of his claim for bonus, the Claimant tendered Exh. C8. That exhibit is headed ''Overall Outstanding To: Obinna Nkwonta Micheal By Multichem Industries Limited (Nigeria)'', it states the entitlement of the Claimant to =N=40,000.00 as salary for August 2014 and ''overall total sales bonuses being owned to me is =N=2,305,227.1''. That exhibit has no name as the author. It carries no date. It also has no signature. It is apparent from the content that it was prepared by the Claimant. Although the Court already admitted this exhibit, the Court is in no way precluded from expunging it if the need arises or refuse to place any reliance on it. See Bayode Afolabi v. Chief Samuel Fehintola Alaremu (2011) LPELR-8894 (CA). The law is settled that an unsigned and undated document has no probative value. See Udo v. Essien & Ors. (2014) LPELR-22684 (CA). I therefore hold that Exh. C8 is of no probative value and is thus expunged from record. I note that Exh. C1 is the foundation upon which the success or failure of Relief 1 rests. Thus, having found and held that there nothing in that exhibit supporting the Relief 1, I refuse the claim for the alleged Claimant's bonus entitlement from 2012 to 2014 as claimed. With respect to the claim for the sum of =N=40,000.00 as salary for the month of August 2014, it remains the duty and burden on the Claimant to lead evidence in support of his claim. In doing this, it is also for the Claimant to properly arrange his evidence in support of his claim. By paragraphs 16 and 17 of the statement of defence dated 16/3/15 there is evidence that the Defendant accepted Claimant's letter of resignation by a letter dated 3/9/14. See also paragraphs 16 & 17 of the Defendant's witness statement on oath dated 17/3/15. There is also sufficient information in those paragraphs of the Defendant's pleadings showing that the Claimant was not paid his salary for the month of August 2014. I find sufficient credible evidence before me to the effect that the Claimant is owed his salary for the month of August 2014. I therefore direct the Defendant to pay to the Claimant the sum of =N=40,000.00 only being the Claimant unpaid salary for the month of August, 2014. Respecting the claim for =N=10,000,000.00 as general damages for the pains/suffering and loss by the Claimant occasioned by the unlawful and wrongful deprivation of the Claimant's entitlement/bonus and benefits, this Court has held refusing the grant of Relief 1 of the Claimant. That relief is the basis upon which this claim for general damages rested. Therefore having refused same, the relief for general damages must also fail. For, the law is trite that you cannot put something on nothing and expect it to stay there. It will collapse. Therefore this claim for general damages fails and same is refused and dismissed accordingly. Respecting the counter claim of the Defendant for the sum of =N=715,000.00, there is no doubt that the Claimant was a sales staff of the Defendant. The Defendant also conceded that the Claimant sold Defendant's goods on credit. The Defendant did not lead evidence as to the liability of the Claimant to pay for goods sold to customers of the Defendant. I find it impossible under the law to hold the Claimant liable for the goods sold to Mr. Tony Peace on credit. I therefore refuse and dismiss the counter claim of the Defendant for lack of proof by credible and cogent evidence. Finally, for the avoidance of doubt and for all the reasons as stated in this Judgment, 1. The claim for entitlement bonus for year 2012 - 2014 in the sum of =N=2,265,227.1 with interest at the rate of 21% from 24/10/11 till date of Judgment is refused and dismissed for lack of proof by credible and cogent evidence. 2. The Defendant is ordered and directed to pay to the Claimant the sum of =N=40,000.00 with interest at the rate of 15% from 31/8/14 per annum until final liquidation. 3. The claim for =N=10,000,000.00 s general damages is refused and dismissed for lack of proof by credible and cogent evidence. 4. The counter claim sought by the Defendant is refused and dismissed for lack of proof by credible and cogent evidence. I make no order as to cost. All the terms of this Judgment shall be complied with within 30 days from today. Judgment is entered accordingly. ____________________ Hon. Justice J. D. Peters Presiding Judge