Download PDF
JUDGMENT 1. Introduction & Claims By his General Form of Complaint, Statement of facts and the accompanying frontloaded processes dated and filed on 30/8/16, the Claimant approached this Court and sought the reliefs as follows - 1. An Order compelling the Defendant to pay =N=1,225,000.00 (One Million, Two Hundred and Twenty Five Thousand Naira) being the Claimant’s outstanding salaries at the rate of =N=245,000.00 (Two Hundred and Forty Fifty Thousand Naira) after meal deduction per month for the period June to October, 2015. 2. An Order compelling the Defendant to pay all the money deducted from the Claimant’s salaries as contribution to pension fund which was never remitted to the Claimant’s pension fund accounts; being =N=750,000.00 (Seven Hundred and Fifty Thousand Naira). 3. An Order compelling the Defendant to release tax clearance certificate to the Claimant or otherwise pay to the Claimant all money deducted as tax from the Claimant’s monthly salary in the sum of =N=231,324.83 (Two Hundred and Thirty One Thousand, Three Hundred and Twenty Four Naira, Eighty Three Kobo). 4. An Order compelling the Defendant to pay =N=1,000,000 (One Million Naira) as cost of this action. The Defendant was duly served the originating processes together with the accompanying documents. There is evidence of the service in the Court's file. The Defendant neither entered an appearance nor filed any defence processes. Indeed throughout the hearing of this case it was only on 13/3/17 that a learned Counsel appeared for the Defendant. 2. Case of the Claimant The Claimant opened his case on 20/6/17. He testified as CW1, adopted his witness deposition dated 30/8/16 as his evidence in chief and tendered 7 documents as exhibits. The documents were admitted in evidence and marked as Exh. CN1-Exh. CN7. The case of the Claimant is that by a letter of appointment dated 24/6/14, he was employed by the Defendant as its Human Resources Manager; that 9 months after resumption of duty, he was given a KIA car as an official car; that he subsequently had an accident with the car and was recommended to have some surgeries; that due to his deteriorating health, he resigned he resigned his appointment in January, 2016' that at the time of his resignation the Defendant owed him the sum of =N=1,225,000.00 being his outstanding salary for 5 months from June to October, 2015; that the Defendant refused to pay him his outstanding salary on the ground that he caused the by driving on a one way; that there was a Police Report respecting the cause of the accident; that the Defendant presented the said Police Report to Wapic Insurance Company to process a comprehensive insurance payment for the car; that the Defendant made pension deductions from his salary for a period of 18 months without remitting same to pension managers and that the Defendant also deducted the sum of =N=231,324.83 from his salary for 18 months being June 2014 to December, 2015 as tax due and payable to government but refused to release the receipts or tax clearance or furnish any evidence of payment to government. Although offered the needed opportunities, the Defendant did not attend Court to cross examine the witness and neither opened its defence. 3. Submissions of learned Counsel Only the learned Counsel to the Claimant filed a final written address. It was dated 24/7/18 and filed on 25/7/8. In it Counsel set down a lone issue for determination as follows - Whether the Claimant is entitled to the relief sought. Arguing this lone issue, learned Counsel submitted that an employee has the right to resign his employment and the employer has no choice than to accept same citing Aprogin Engineering Construction Nigeria Limited v. Jacques Bigouret & Anor. (2015)52 NWLR (Pt. 173) 1 at 43; that a letter of resignation takes effect from the date it is received citing Sidmach Technologies Nigeria Ltd v. Onurah (2014)46 NWLR (Pt. 148 at 290; that after the accident the Defendant stopped paying Claimant's salary for five months contrary to the contract between the parties and that parties are bound by their agreement citing KAYDEE Ventures Limited v. Ministry of FCT (2010)7 NWLR (Pt. 1192) 171 at 222. Learned Counsel added that the Defendant made deductions both for taxes as well as for pension without making remissions to appropriate authorities and that the evidence led by the Claimant having remained unchallenged the Court is duty bound to accept and act on same citing Kopek Construction Limited v. Ekisola (2010)3 NWLR (Pt. 1182) 618 at 663. Learned Counsel prayed the Court to grant all the reliefs sought by the Claimant. 4. Decision The case of the Claimant in brief as revealed from his pleadings and evidence led is that he worked with the Defendant; that he was given an official car; that he had accident with the car; that a Police Report was obtained; that the Defendant stopped paying his salary for five months after the accident on the ground that he was responsible for the accident and that aside from the unpaid 5 months' salary, the Defendant made deductions for pension and for tax yet did not remit same to the appropriate authorities. Although the Defendant had notice of this case, it elected not to defend same. It did not even enter an appearance. Let it be said for the sake of doing so that a party sued is not obliged to defend the suit. Refusal to defend may be due to a simple desire to abide by whatever decision the Court takes. I have carefully read and understood all the processes filed by the learned Counsel to the Claimant. I patiently heard the oral testimony and watched the demeanor of the Claimant in chief at trial. I evaluated all the exhibits tendered and admitted as well as heard the oral argument of learned Counsel to the Claimant. Having done all this, I adopt the lone issue set down by the Claimant for the determination of this case as follows - Whether the Claimant is entitled to the reliefs sought. The reliefs sought by the Claimant are essentially 4 in number. The first relief is for an Order compelling the Defendant to pay =N=1,225,000.00 (One Million, Two Hundred and Twenty Five Thousand Naira) being the Claimant’s outstanding salaries at the rate of =N=245,000.00 (Two Hundred and Forty Fifty Thousand Naira) after meal deduction per month for the period June to October, 2015. In paragraph 10 of his statement on oath the Claimant averred that at the time he resigned from his employment, the Defendant owed him 5 months' salary in the sum of =N=1,225,000.00 in arrears. Same was contained in paragraph 10 of his witness deposition which was adopted as evidence in chief. These averments and the evidence led in support of same were not challenged by the Defendant notwithstanding that the Defendant had opportunity to do so. The law is trite that a Court of law is bound to accept and act on unchallenged piece of evidence. See Omoregbe v Lawani (1980) 3 - 4 SC 108 at 117; Nzeribe v Dave Engineering Co. Ltd (1994) & NWLR (Pt.351) 124 at 137 & Mabamije v. Otto(2016) LPELR (SC) In the absence of adverse challenge therefore, I grant this relief. I here order the Defendant to pay to the Claimant the sum of =N=1,225,000.00 being the Claimant's 5 months' unpaid salary at the rate of =N=245,000.00 per month from June to October, 2015. See Adejumo v. Ayantegbe (1989) 3 NWLR (Pt. 110) 417 & Gege v. Nande (2006) 10 NWLR (Pt.988) 256. The second relief sought is for an Order compelling the Defendant to pay all the money deducted from the Claimant’s salaries as contribution to pension fund which was never remitted to the Claimant’s pension fund accounts; being =N=750,000.00 (Seven Hundred and Fifty Thousand Naira). In paragraph 24 of his statement of facts and his witness written deposition, Claimant averred that the Defendant deducted the sum of =N=750,236.00 from his salaries for pension without remitting the money to Pension Managers. The Pension Reform Act, 2014 brought into being a new pension regime - a contributory pension scheme, see section 2, Pension Reform Act, 2014. By the contributory pension scheme both the employer and the employee are to contribute a certain percentage of the employee's salary into a Retirement Savings Account, see section 11, to be opened by an employee with a Pension Fund Administrator. The deductions made are expected to be paid into the said retirement savings account on a monthly basis. The deductions so deposited into the account are meant for the benefit of the employee. Now, there is no evidence before me to show that the Claimant as an employee opened a retirement savings account as expected under the applicable pension statute. However, Exh. CN7 is evidence of deductions made from the salary of the Claimant for pension. The deductions made for pension are still with the Defendant. I had stated in this Judgment that the pension deductions are meant for the benefit of the Claimant. There being no evidence of Retirement Savings Account and remittances of same as directed by the Pension Reform Act, 2014, I hold that the Claimant is entitled to the sums deducted from his salary for pensions. I thus grant this head of claim. The Defendant is here ordered to pay to the Claimant the sum of =N=750,000.00 being the sum deducted from the Claimant's salary as pension deductions. The third relief is for an Order compelling the Defendant to release tax clearance certificate to the Claimant or otherwise pay to the Claimant all money deducted as tax from the Claimant’s monthly salary in the sum of =N=231,324.83 (Two Hundred and Thirty One Thousand, Three Hundred and Twenty Four Naira, Eighty Three Kobo). Apart from the pleadings of the Claimant and his evidence in chief in support of his case, Exh. CN7 is a proof of deduction made for purposes of tax. The payment of tax is statutorily mandatory for all and sundry who are gainfully employed. The need to pay tax by all is imperative if the government is to meet its campaign promises to the populace and make dividends of democracy available. No doubt the provision of social services and protection of lives and property will be impossible if citizenry would not pay tax. The Claimant has sought an Order compelling the Defendant to release tax clearance certificate to the Claimant or otherwise pay to the Claimant all money deducted as tax from the Claimant’s monthly. There is no evidence before me to the effect that the Defendant has custody of the tax certificate of the Claimant. I must also take judicial notice of the fact that the Defendant is not a tax authority and hence cannot issue tax certificate. To order the Defendant to pay back to the Claimant all the money deducted as tax is not in the interest of justice especially on the part of the State.. For to do so will deny the State of her much needed revenue to meet its obligation to the society at large. It is in the light of this that this Court will not make an order for the Defendant to pay back or refund to him the amount deducted as tax. I here order and direct the Defendant to make available to the Claimant through his Counsel receipt for the payment of Claimant's tax to the appropriate tax authority. Learned Counsel to the Claimant is further directed to bring to the attention of the appropriate tax authority the purport of this Judgment. Claimant also sought an award of cost in the sum of =N=1,000,000.00. This case was filed on 30/8/16. Claimant and Counsel appeared in this Court almost ten times. This is aside from the cost incurred in filing this suit. Having considered the whole circumstances of this case, I award the sum of =N=200,000.00 as cost of this action payable by the Defendant to the Claimant. Finally, for the avoidance of doubt and for all the reasons as contained in this Judgment 1. I order the Defendant to pay to the Claimant the sum of =N=1,225,000.00 being the Claimant's 5 months' unpaid salary at the rate of =N=245,000.00 per month from June to October, 2015. 2. I order the Defendant to pay to the Claimant the sum of =N=750,000.00 being the sum deducted from the Claimant's salary as pension deductions. 3. Learned Counsel to the Claimant is directed to bring to the attention of the appropriate tax authority the purport of this Judgment. 4. I award the sum of =N=200,000.00 as cost of this action payable by the Defendant to the Claimant. All the sums due and payable under and by virtue of this Judgment, except cost, are to be paid within 30 days from today. Judgment is entered accordingly. ____________________ Hon. Justice J. D. Peters Presiding Judge