IN THE NATIONAL INDUSTRIAL COURT OF NIGERIA
IN THE LAGOS JUDICIAL DIVISION
HOLDEN AT LAGOS
BEFORE HIS LORDSHIP, HON. JUSTICE (Dr) l. J. ESSIEN
DATE: 16th May, 2019
SUIT NO. NICN/LA/576/2015
BETWEEN
- ONYENUCHIE IKECHUKWU G.C ————————– CLAIMANT
AND
GLOBAL SCANSYSTEMS LIMITED —————————- DEFENDANT
REPRESENTATION;
Mercy Agugua Esq. for the claimant.
No representation for the defendant
JUDGMENT
By a complaint dated and filed on the 24/11/2015, the claimant claimed against the defendant as follows;
1) AN ORDER to the Defendant to pay to the Claimant the sum of N13, 863, 854. 09k (thirteen million, eight hundred and sixty three thousand, eight hundred and fifty four naira, nine kobo) being accumulated wages/salaries, allowances, leave grants and severance benefits from the 9th day of February, 2006 to the 29th day of September, 2015, being special damages.
2) ALTERNATIVELY the sum of N4, 181, 184.91 [Four Million, One Hundred and Eighty-One Thousand, One Hundred and Eighty-Four Naira, Ninety-One Kobo] only being the sum agreed by the defendant to be due to the claimant pursuant to the letter of cessation of contract/employment dated the 29th day of September, 2015, issued to the claimant by the defendant as special damages.
3) The sum of N20, 000, 000.00 (Twenty Million Naira) being general damages for breach of contract of employment, detention of the sum as stated in relief ‘2’ above and the cost of this suit.
The originating process in this suit was served on the defendant on 24/11/2015, who engaged messrs ‘Fortress Solicitors’ to enter appearance for the defendant and in other sister cases. However no defence was entered for the defendant in this suit nor did the defendant solicitors appear in court to put in a defence for the defendant in this suit.
Hearing in this suit commenced on the 13/2/2019 with the claimant testifying as CW1. The claimant adopted his witness deposition and tendered the following document in evidence in proof of his case;
- Letter of appointment dated 9/2/2006, exhibit C1.
- Letter of confirmation of appointment, exhibit C2.
- Letter of adjustment in designation dated 1/9/2008, exhibit C3.
- Letter of renewal of appointment, exhibit C4.
- Claimant pay slip marked exhibits C5a and C5b.
- Letter of request for meeting exhibit C6.
- Letter of notification of cessation of appointment, exhibit C7a and C7b
- Claimant statement of account exhibit C 8.
- Solicitors letter of demand, exhibit C 9.
At the close of evidence in chief of the CW1 (the claimant), the matter was adjourned to the 19/3/2019 for cross examination and defence. Despite the service of hearing notice on the counsel to the defendant they were absent in court. The defendant was foreclosed upon the application of the claimant counsel. The matter was again adjourned to the 8/4/2019 for adoption of final written address of the claimant counsel.
BRIEF STATEMENT OF THE FACTS.
The case of the claimant is that he was employed by the defendant on the 9/2/2006 as the data entry officer whose position was latter designated as officer 1. The appointment was confirmed on the 19/8/2006 on a monthly salary of N40,000. The employment was latter renewed on the 1/6/2013 for a period of 6 months. That by the terms of the employment each party was entitled to one month notice which the defendant failed to serve the claimant. The claimant alleges that at the expiration of the 6 months the defendant failed to terminate the contract but continued to treat the contract as on going. That there was discrepancies in the salary he was paid leading to his complain to the defendant management by himself along with other staff of the defendant. On the 29/9/2015 the claimant was issued a letter of ceasation of contract appointment which the claimant allege was back dated to 31/8/2015 despite the fact that he had worked for the month of August and September, 2015. The claimant now claims the areas of salary from 9/2/2006 to 29/9/2015 or in the alternative the sum of N4,181,184.91 stated as his areas of salary in the letter of cessation of employment dated 29/9/2015. This in a nutshell is the facts of this case
From the facts of this case and the evidence adduced in the course of the trial, the issue for determination is whether the claimant has been able to offer proof to be entitled to the reliefs sought in this case.
In relief No 1 the claimant seeks an order directing the defendant to pay to the claimant the sum of N l3, 863, 854. 09 (Thirteen Million, Eight Hundred and Sixty Three Thousand, Eight Hundred and fifty four Naira, Nine Kobo) being accumulated wages/salaries, allowances, leave grants and severance benefits from the 9th day of February, 2006 to the 29th day of September, 2015, being special damages. From the evidence adduced in this suit it does appear that the relevant period of dispute as far as the contract of employment between the defendant and the claimant is concerned the period commencing from the renewal of the contract of employment vide exhibit C4, which is 1/6/2013. There is nowhere in the pleadings that the claimant pleaded that he was not paid his salary and allowances from the 9/2/2006 when he was first offered appointment vide exhibit C 1 by the defendant. Also no evidence was adduced by the claimant before this court to that effect. By the nature of the first relief claimed by the claimant which is in the nature of special damages the law requires the claimant to offer strict proof of his entitlement to the sum of N l3, 863, 854. 09. In the case of Owoeye V. Wema Bank Ltd. [2001]9 NWLR (pt) 717 at pg.1. The court of Apeal reiterated that special damages must not only be specifically pleaded, it must be strictly proved. See also the case of Ndinwa V. Nwaebo [2001] 6NWLR (Pt 709) pg. 321. The claimant counsel in his address has argued that since there is no defence to this suit this court should deem the claims as proved. This is a clear misstatement of the law. When it comes to special damages the standard of proof is strict. The mere fact that the claim of special damages was not challenged cannot without more entitle a party to same in the absence of strict proof. See the case of Consolidated Breweries PLC V Aisowieren. (2001) 15NWLR (Pt.736) 424. The court held that unchallenged evidence, without more, constitute sufficient proof of special damages .See also Boshali v. Allied Commercial Exporters Ltd.[1961]2 SCNLR 322.
On the strength of the above cited authority this court hereby holds that the claimant not only failed to specifically plead his entitlement to the sum of N l3, 863, 854. 09k, as claimed in the first relief, he also failed to offer strict proof as required by law to be entitled to the said relief. The first claim must fail and it is accordingly dismissed.
The claimant in this suit also claims the sum of the sum of N4, 181, 184.91 (Four Million, One Hundred and Eighty-One Thousand, One Hundred and Eighty-Four Naira, Ninety-One Kobo only) in the ALTERNATIVELY, being the sum agreed by the defendant to be due to the claimant pursuant to the letter of cessation of contract/employment dated the 29th day of September, 2015, issued to the claimant by the defendant as special damages.
In prove of this claim the claimant tendered Exhibit C4 the letter of renewal of appointment for a further 6 months with the defendant dated the 1/6/2013. He also tendered Exhibit C7 the letter of ceasation of contract/appointment which took effect from the 31/8/2015. He also tendered another letter from the defendant dated the 29/9/2015 where in his final computation is stated to be N4, 181, 184.91. I have carefully perused the above mentioned exhibits. It is clear from exhibit C7b that the defendants by their conduct have admitted owing the claimant the sum stated in exhibit C7b which is claimed in the alternative in this suit. The law is that a court can only consider the award of an alternative relief when it is practically impossible to award any of the items sought in the main relief. The rule is either the plaintiff succeeds in the main claim or the alternative claim. See the case of Holborn Nigeria Limited VS. O. C. Chris Enterprises Ltd. [2O14] LPELR-23972. The defendant having admitted in exhibit C7b the sum claimed in this alternative relief, this court hereby enters judgment in the sum of N4, 181, 184.91k in favour of the claimant against the defendant in this suit.
In relief (3) the claimant claims general damages in the sum of N20, 000, 000.00 (Twenty Million Naira] being general damages for breach of contract of employment. Detention of the sum as stated in relief 2 above and the cost of this suit. It is trite that a party will be entitled to claim general damages where the action of the other party has caused loss or inconveniences which the claimant would not have suffered but for the conduct of the defendant. The amount awarded by this court in the alternative claim ought to have been paid to the claimant since 27/9/2015. I am satisfied that witholding the said amount by the defendant has caused some inconveniences to the claimant. Moreso, that the defendant’s refusal to pay the claimant has resulted in this present action. I am satisfied that this is an appropriate case in which the claimant ought to be awarded general damages. Accordingly I award the sum of N 300,000 general damages against the defendant in favour of the claimant.
On the whole reliefs 2 and 3 of the claims of the claimant in this suit succeeds. Judgment is hereby entered accordingly.
_____________________________________
HON. JUSTICE (DR.) I. J. ESSIEN
(Presiding Judge)
