Sapara V. University College Hospital Board Of Management (1988)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

O. OBASEKI, J.S.C. 

The appellant was in the service of the respondent for 17 1/2 years before her dismissal from the service. Upon her dismissal, she filed an action in the High Court of Justice of Oyo State at Ibadan claiming:

1. ”Declaration that the purported dismissal of the plaintiff from the defendant’s service by a letter Ref. No. P4191/103 of 27th February, 1979 and the procedure adopted by the defendant in connection therewith were irregular. null and void and were contrary to the procedure laid down in the conditions of service drawn up by the defendant for their employees and, or were contrary to the principles of natural justice.
2. An order that the plaintiff be reinstated in her post as Kitchen Supervisor (Dining Room) with effect from 1st March, 1979 OR

Alternatively, the plaintiff claims the following as damages:

(i) Salary for 7 1/2 years N34,020.00

(ii) Gratuity at 60 years 5,832.00

39,852.00

(iii) Order for the payment of pension at the rate of N756.00 per annum i.e. 30% of terminal salary.”

The defendant’s main contention in the High Court and the Court of Appeal is that:

“The action is not maintainable in law as there was no legal right of contract vested in the plaintiff and that there was no intention to create legal relationship with the plaintiff as provided for in sub-section (2)(b) of the “Condition of Service”.

This subsection (2)(b) stipulates that:

“The ‘conditions of service’ do not constitute a contract between the Board of Management and its officer/employee and nothing in this ‘conditions of service’ shall confer on any officer/employee a legal right to the benefit of any of their provisions and the Board of Management may at any time revoke, alter, add to or amended the conditions laid down therein.”

The High Court (Olowofoyeku, J.) dismissed the contention after hearing evidence of the parties and their witnesses and the addresses of counsel to the parties. He gave judgment in favour of the plaintiff for N5,091.20 damages. The learned trial Judge in his judgment dealing with the issue of legal relationship, said:

“I have not found it easy on the evidence before me to place the relationship between the plaintiff and the defendant or more precisely, to place it outside that of a purely master and servant relationship in which case she will not be entitled to the protection of the Rules of natural justice….Counsel for the plaintiff has not pressed her claim on the breach of the procedure for discipline provided in the relevant regulation 61 of the Conditions of Service Exhibit D. Even if she did, I have not been informed that the mandatory procedural requirement therein prescribed have express statutory sanction.

…….am therefore of the view that the relationship between the plaintiff and the defendant is that of master and servant and accordingly she is not entitled to the observations of the rules of natural justice before she could be dismissed from her employment.