Nigerian Telecommunication Ltd. V. Simon Ugbe (2001)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

MUNTAKA-COOMASSIE, J.C.A.

The plaintiff before instituting an action was an assistant chief commercial superintendent in the services of Nigerian Telecommunications Plc. Later he received a letter dated 27/2/97 dismissing him from his post. The dismissal letter stated, among others, that “in the public interest, your services with Nitel Ltd. are no longer required. You are therefore dismissed with effect from 26th February, 1997, under the provisions of Decree No. 17 of 1984. The plaintiff hereinafter referred to as the respondent approached the Federal High Court Abuja by way of filing an originating summons challenging his dismissal. In effect, the summons sought to nullify the letter of dismissal dated 27/2/97 served on him by the appellant herein. Before the commencement of the hearing before that court, Nigerian Telecommunications Ltd, now appellant, filed a preliminary objection dated 20/5/97 challenging the commencement of the suit by originating summons.

The respondent then filed an application which has not been opposed by the appellant the result of which the Federal High Court Abuja duly transferred on 28/10/97 to the High Court. No appearances by the parties were recorded on that day. Consequently, the suit came up on 27/4/98, after three different adjournments. And on 27/4/98, the respondent’s counsel, according to the appellant, moved the court to strike out the preliminary objection filed by the appellant. The court then struck out the objection and adjourned the substantive suit to 11/6/98 for hearing.

The suit was however not heard on 11/6/98 until 21/10/98 in the absence of the appellant and their counsel. The court entered judgment in favour of the respondent herein by its ruling delivered on 4/11/98. That court ordered for the re-instatement of the respondent to his post.

The appellant, upon receipt of certificate of judgment, briefed a new counsel, in the name of Paul Usoro to defend its interest. The appellant unsuccessfully applied to set aside the default judgment and to extend the time within which the appellant may file and serve its counter affidavit on the matter. The trial court, based on the counter- affidavit filed by the respondent, dismissed the appellant’s motion and re-affirmed its earlier judgment. The appeal is against that judgment delivered on 4/11/98.

By the order of this court made on 21/9/99, the appellant’s notice of appeal was filed out of time-it contains ground of appeal as follows:

GROUND OF APPEAL

The Learned Trial Judge erred in law when he ordered that:

“The Plaintiff should be re-instated to his post as Assistant Chief Commercial Superintendent in the Nigerian Telecommunications Limited without loss of salaries, allowance, increments, promotions and other benefits.”

PARTICULARS

1. The appellant is a Limited Liability company incorporated under the Companies and Allied Matters Act, 1991 and not a Statutory Corporation or part of the Civil Service of Nigeria.
2. Appellant’s employment was governed by conditions of Service.

Consequently, with the rules of this court, parties have exchanged briefs. The appellant relied and adopted their brief of argument filed on 23/2/2000. They formulated two issues for the consideration of the appeal by this court thus:

“1. In the assumption that the dismissal was lawful, (which is denied by the appellant), can the lower court in any case order the re-instatement of the respondent to his employment with the appellant?

2. Was the respondent’s dismissal from employment lawful?”

The respondent in turn submitted the only issue for determination is that:

“Can the trial court order the re-instatement of the respondent to his employment with the appellant. Having declared the dismissal null and void?”