Download PDF
By a Complaint dated and filed on the 30th day of October 2012 the Claimant claims against the Defendant the following reliefs: 1. Declaration that the purported termination of the employment of the Claimant by the Defendant as depot manager, Aba Depot vides a letter dated the 2nd day of June 2011 with ref. No. D-HR/TERM.0109120/2011 is wrongful, irregular, in bad faith and in breach of the terms and conditions of employment. 2. AN ORDER nullifying and setting aside the purported termination as conveyed by a letter dated the 2nd day of June 2011. ALTERNATIVELY 3. AN ORDER DIRECTING THE DEFENDANT TO PAY THE Claimant the sum of N6, 719, 120.000.00 (Six Million, Seven Hundred and Nineteen Thousand One Hundred and Twenty Naira) only as unpaid salaries and allowances on the following scenario: a) Unpaid Salaries for the Sixteen months N3.2Million naira. b) Unpaid leave allowances N2, 540.120.00. c) Unpaid sampling allowance N141, 120.00 d) Unpaid Arrears of increment N320,000.00 e) Unpaid meal subsidy N240.000.00 f) Unpaid weekend allowance of N250, 000.00 GRAND TOTAL: N6, 791, 120.00 i) The sum of N3, 000.00 (Three Million naira) as general damages for the wrongful termination of the Claimant’s employment. The Complaint is accompanied with a Statement of Facts establishing the cause of action, list of witnesses, list of documents to be relied upon at trial, Statement on Oath of CW1 Mr Okonkwo I. Francis and copies of documents to be relied upon at trial. The defendant/applicant entered appearance on 30th November 2012. The defendant/applicant equally filed a motion on notice dated 29th day of June 2012 but filed on 30th day of June 2012 praying this Honourable Court for: AN ORDER dismissing/striking out this suit on the ground that it is an abuse of the process of this Honourable Court and this Honourable Court is not competent to entertain it. AND for such FURTHER ORDER or ORDERS as this Honourable Court may deem fit to make in the circumstance. The motion on notice is supported by an affidavit of ten paragraphs deposed to by one Emeka Ijezie, a litigation officer in the law firm of Emeka O. Nwagwu & Associates, counsel for the Defendant. Attached to the said affidavit are exhibits A1-18, Exhibits 21-3, Exhibit 31-2 and Exhibit 4. The Defendant/Applicant’s counsel also filed a written address which is dated 29th day of November 2012 in support of the said preliminary objection. Thereafter the claimant/respondent on 31st day of January 2013 filed a counter affidavit deposed to by the claimant/respondent himself. The said counter affidavit has ten paragraphs. There is also a written address dated 21st day of January, 2013 in support of the counter affidavit in reaction to the preliminary objection. Learned counsel to the parties adopted their respective written addresses on the 7th of March 2013. On the day of the adoption learned counsel for the claimant/respondent tendered from the bar a certified true copy of the order of Aba High Court striking Suit No. A/36/2012. I have carefully considered the processes, arguments and submissions of learned counsel to the parties in this application. The sole issue for determination is whether or not this suit is an abuse of the process of this Honourable Court. The defendant/applicant’s case is that this suit is an abuse of court process because the claimant/respondent instituted this action while there was a pending action before the High Court of Abia State Aba Judicial Division with Suit No. A/36/2012. He submitted that abuse of court process is an impressive concept and involves circumstances and situations of infinite variety and conditions. He further argued that the common feature where it occurs is the improper use of judicial process by a party in litigation to interfere with the due administration of justice. However he added that the employment of judicial process is only generally regarded as an abuse when a party improperly uses the judicial process to the irritation and annoyance of his opponent and the efficient and effective administration of justice. He referred to and relied on the case of Dingyadi vs INEC (2010) All FWLR (Pt. 550) 1204 at 1254 paragraphs A-G; Okafor vs A-G Anambra State (1991) 6 NWLR (Pt. 200) 659 att 681 paras C-D and Saraki vs Kotoye (1992) 9 NWLR (Pt. 264) 156 at 169-170 and 188-189. Learned defendant/applicant’s counsel argued also that the claimant had not complied with Order II(1)(a)(b) (2) and (3) of Abia State High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules 2009 in filing his notice of discontinuance of the suit before the Abia State High Court. On his own part, learned counsel for the claimant/respondent argued that the notice of discontinuance filed by a party in any suit brings the action against the plaintiff/defendant to an end, without further intervention from the court. Counsel referred to A. Ogunkunle & Ors vs Registered Trustees of Eternal Sacred Order of the Cherubim & Seraphim & Ors (2001) F.W.L.R (Pt. 62) 1866 at 1874. Learned counsel further stated that where a party is entitled to discontinue an action without leave of court, the mission is accomplished and the proceedings stand terminated upon presentation of the notice of discontinuance. He continued that the formal striking out of the Suit is a mere formality or burial of the carcass of the suit which terminated on the filing of the notice. Counsel stated further that the defendant/applicant never filed any defence to the suit at the Aba High Court as to require leave of the court before discontinuing the suit. He referred to the case of Ezomo vs A-G Bendel State (1986) 4 NWLR (Pt. 36) 448 where the Court of Appeal held that: …an appeal stands dismissed on filing of a notice of discontinuance, neither of the parties need further appear in court. Learned claimant’s Counsel submitted that the suit at Aba High Court was no longer in existence, it is dead the claimant having filed a notice for its discontinuance. Having considered all the arguments and submissions of counsel to the parties, it is clear that while the claimant/respondent had filed a suit before the Abia State High Court with Suit No A/36/2012, the claimant had filed a notice of discontinuance which in fact resulted in the striking out of the said suit by the Abia State High Court. However, the thrust of the defendant/applicant’s argument is that before the suit was at Abia State High Court was struck out it co-existed with the present suit and therefore that amounted to an abuse of court process for which this suit should be dismissed or at least struck out. The question though is what really amounts to an abuse of court process and whether the claimant’s suit has abused that process. The critical point about the meaning of abuse of court process as rightly pointed out by the Claimant’s counsel is the use of the judicial process to the irritation and annoyance of the opponent or interference with the due administration of justice by filing and maintaining more than one suit or application before the same or different courts. The Supreme Court has clearly expressed this in the case of Saraki & Saraki vs N. A. B. Kotoye (1992), supra, and also reported as (1992) LPELR-3016 (SC), Per Karibi-Whyte JSC, wherein it was stated that: The abuse lies in the multiplicity and manner of the exercise of the right, rather than the exercise of the right, per se. The abuse consists in the intention, purpose, and aim of the person exercising the right to harass, irritate and annoy the adversary and interfere with the administration of justice; such as instituting different actions between the same parties simultaneously in different courts, even though on different grounds. In the instant case, there was an objection to jurisdiction raised by the defendant in the Abia State High Court and thereafter a notice of discontinuance filed by the claimant. The claimant then approached this court after filing the notice of discontinuance at the Abia State High Court. It is difficult to see how a party that has sought to discontinue a matter before one court because it was convinced that that court had no jurisdiction to entertain the matter at hand and approached the Court now vested with jurisdiction, can be successfully blamed for abusing court process. It has to be stressed that part of what would make a suit to be an abuse of court process involves some bias, malice, and some desire to misuse or pervert the system. See First Bank of Nigeria PLC vs T.S.A. Industries Limited (2012) LPELR-9714 (SC). There is nothing before the court to show any of these in the claimant’s suit before this court. Accordingly therefore, it is my finding and holding that this suit of the claimant is not an abuse of court process. in the circumstance and for all the reasons given, the preliminary objection of the defendant/applicant fails and is hereby dismissed. the case shall proceed to hearing. i make no order as to costs. Ruling is entered accordingly. Hon.Justice Auwal Ibrahim Presiding Judge