Wilbros Nig. Ltd. & Anor. V. Onwume Macaulay (2009)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

SULEIMAN GALADIMA, J.C.A.

This is an appeal against the decision of T.K. Osu (J) sitting, at the High Court of Rivers State delivered on 11/6/1996, entering judgment in favour of the Respondent in the sum of N740,000 (Seven Hundred and Forty Thousand Naira).

At the trial, the Respondent as plaintiff in his amended statement of claim, claimed for various declarations against the 1st and 2nd Appellants, as defendants, jointly and severally as follows:

1. A declaration that his dismissal from the 1st Appellant was null, void and of no effect.

2. A declaration that his detention by the police, on the instruction, instigation, complaint or report of the Respondent was malicious, without reasonable grounds and unlawful.

3. A declaration that the detention of his uncle’s car by the police without any reasonable ground was unlawful and unconstitutional.

4. A declaration that he had been maliciously by the Appellants in copying his dismissal letter to several third Parties.

5. The Respondent also claimed special damages for unlawful dismissal (representing what he would have earned if he had continued in employment for 20 years at the rate of his current stipulated 5% annual increment as the time of his termination) in the sum of N1,562,429,62 (One Million, Five Hundred and Sixty-Two Thousand, Four Hundred and Twenty Nine Naira, Sixty-Two Kobo only).

This included N5000,000 (Five hundred thousand naira) in aggravated and exemplary damages for declaration and N60,000 (Sixty Thousand Naira) for unlawful detention of Respondents uncle’s car from December 1990 – July 1991 .

Pleadings were duly filed and exchanges by the parties to the suit. The Appellants contended before the Trial Court that the dismissal of the Respondent was in accordance with clause 26.5 of the Contract of Employment that the Respondent was involved in fraudulent activity in its payroll section which had culminated in the loss of N553,008.16 by the 1st Appellant. The Appellants denied defaming Respondent as they were not responsible for neither the detention of the Respondent nor his uncle’s car.

The Respondent called 3 witnesses and tendered some documents as Exhibits in evidence. The Appellants on their part tendered three documentary evidence through 4 of their witnesses.

After consideration of the evidence by both parties the learned trial Judge held that the dismissal of the Respondent was unlawful because the 1st Appellant did not comply with clause 26.5 of the Employment Contract. His Lordship accordingly awarded damages against the Appellants jointly and severally in the total sum of N740,000.

Dissatisfied with the decision of the learned trial Judge, the Appellants have appealed to this court on seven grounds set and in the Notice of Appeal filed on the 14th day of June, 1996 as follows:

“1. The judgment is against the weight of evidence.