Ababa F. Adole & Anor. V. Pipelines and Products Marketing Co. Ltd. (PPMC) & Anor. (2009)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

BABA ALKALI BA’ABA, J.C.A.

This is an appeal against the ruling of the Kaduna State High Court in suit No. KDH/KAD/530/95 delivered on the 23rd day of June, 2004 in which the appellant’s suit was struck out for want of jurisdiction.

By a writ of summon dated the 2nd day of August, 1995, against the respondents and subsequently filed a statement of claim dated the 15th day of November, 2002, filed on the 25th day of November, 2002 and the appellants by his paragraph 19 of the statement of claim, claims as follows:-

“1. A declaration that the termination of appointments of the Plaintiffs on 1st August, 1994 (Mr. J.E. Kokya, Mr. Ababa Francis Adole and Mr. Abubakar Kabir) was based on the queries Ref. Nos. – PPMC/HQ/PER/3595 dated 3rd January 1994, PPMC/HQ/PER/C.12185 dated 14th Sept., 1993 and PPMC/HQ/PER/C.15791 dated 14th September, 1993 for which the Plaintiffs were accused of illegal “off allocation” of products, swapping of marketers not officially programmed to load products and of receiving gratification for favoritism to marketers.

2. A declaration that receiving gratification is a criminal offence for which no disciplinary action can be taken except proved in accordance with the laws of the land.
3. An order declaring that none of the allegations was proved by the Disciplinary Committee set up by the Management Executive Committee of the Defendants.
4. An order holding that the purported termination of appointment of the Plaintiffs on the unproved allegations, was wrongful, illegal, null and void and of no effect.
5. An order directing that the Plaintiffs to be reinstated and be paid all their entitlements from the date of the purported termination of appointments to date of judgment.
6. General damages in the sum of N5 million for unlawful termination of appointment. ”

Sequel to a preliminary objection raised by the learned counsel for the respondents/defendants, Mr. Suleiman Akasawua, Esq, relying on the authority of EDEGBERO v. NEPA & ORS. (2002) 18 NWLR (PT.798) AT 95 – 97, the learned trial Judge in his ruling held inter alia as follows:-

“Accordingly by virtue of the Supreme Court decision in EDEGBEROS case and the effect of Section 230(1) 1979 as amended section of Decree No. 107 of 1993. I hereby strike out the suit for want of jurisdiction. I advice the Plaintiff to file their suit before the Federal High Court, Kaduna.”

The learned trial Judge on the issue of transfer at pages 32 – 33 of the record held:-

“The next issue now is whether this Honourable Court having held that it has no jurisdiction, it can transfer the matter to the Federal High Court. I have been referred to the case of WINDIBIRI & 1 OR VS. NJILA (2002) FWLR part 132 page 96 at 134 paragraph A – C and Section 22(3) Federal High Court Act CAP 134 LFN 1990. It was held by the Court of Appeal that by virtue of Section 22(3), the ‘High Court of a State may transfer a matter before it to the Federal High Court where the rules of such court so permit.”

Dissatisfied with the ruling dated the 23rd day of June, 2004, the appellants who was the plaintiff filed a notice of appeal dated the 7th day of October, 2004 filed on the 28th day of October, 2004 at pages 34 – 35 of the record containing two grounds of appeal as follows:-

“GROUND 1

The learned trial Judge erred in law when in refusing to transfer this case to the Federal High Court, he held: ………”

GROUND 2

The learned trial Judge was in error when he failed to exercise his discretion to cause the transfer of the action to the Federal High Court.”

In accordance with the rules of practice and procedure of this Court briefs of argument were filed and exchanged between counsel to the parties.