MR. Benedict Chidobem Ajuzi V. First Bank Of Nigeria PLC (2016)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report – COURT OF APPEAL

FREDERICK OZIAKPONO?OHO, J.C.A.(Delivering the Leading Judgment)

Before the High Court of Abia State sitting at Umuahia, BENEDICT CHIDOBEM AJUZIE brought an action against FIRST BANK OF NIGERIA PLC., claiming as per his Amended Statement of Claim the following reliefs:

1. A Order of the Honourable Court declaring as wrongful, the dismissal of the Plaintiff by the Defendant on the 11th day of May, 2007 and N499,000.00 (Four Hundred and Ninety-Nine Thousand Naira) damages in consequence thereof.
2. An Order of the Honourable Court reinstating the Plaintiff to his former position, as Senior Bank Officer (S.B.O) as at the 11th day of May, 2007.
3. An Order of the Honourable Court directing/mandating the Defendant by itself or its management, to pay to the Plaintiff the sum of N1,758,000.00 (One Million, Seven Hundred and Fifty-Eight Thousand Naira) being salary arrears deprived the Plaintiff from the month of April, 2007 to the month of June, 2009.
4. An Order of the Honourable Court directing/mandating the Defendant by itself or its management to continue to pay the Plaintiff the sum of N68,000.00 (Sixty-Eight Thousand

1

Naira) per month or as may be reviewed upwards by Defendant in line with the employment scheme from the month of July, 2008 until he is retired in accordance with the Bank’s?s regulations.

5. 10% interest being the prevailing bank rate on the N1,758,000.00 (One Million, Seven Hundred & Fifty-Eight Thousand Naira), that is to say, the sum N175,800.00 (One Hundred and Seventy-Five Thousand, Eight Hundred Naira) from the month of April, 2007 to and including the month of June, 2009.
6. An Order of the Honourable Court directing/mandating the Defendant Bank by itself or through its management to continue to pay the Plaintiff his monthly salary of N68,000.00 (Sixty-Eight Thousand Naira) or such reviewed salary until retirement or disengaged in line with the 1st Defendant Bank’s regulations.

AND/OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE:

An Order of the Court directing/mandating the Respondent Bank to retire the Plaintiff in line with the retirement and pension scheme applicable to Bank Employees without prejudice to the payment of the Plaintiff all accrued arrears of salary and benefits attached to his position.

Pleadings were duly filed and

2

exchanged between the parties. The Appellant as Claimant at the Lower Court adopted his written deposition on Oath and called no witnesses while the Respondent called a witness, one Mr. Obinna Ikonne, who also adopted his written deposition on Oath and called no other witnesses. A number of documentary Exhibits were tendered by the parties at the time of hearing. The Claimant tendered Exhibits A to L while the Respondent as Defendant tendered an Exhibit M, which is the Respondent?s Employees? Hand book. The learned trial Judge after hearing evidence and listening to the addresses of Counsel, in a well considered judgment entered judgment in favour of Defendants.

?

The facts of this case as can be gleaned from the averments of the parties in their respective pleadings are that the Claimant by Exhibits B and B1 was a staff of the Defendant who rose to the rank of Head Operations Support (HOS) in the Umuahia Branch of the Respondent. Part of the duties of the Head Operations Support in the Branch was to delegate any available driver to leave for the Airport to pick up those that went on ?specie? to Lagos. By ?Specie? in

3

Banking terminology it simply means; ?MONEY?. It also includes the movement of money (usually large sums) from one point to another. Under usual Banking practice and policy including the Respondent, specie are usually carried out with armed Police escorts.

On the 2nd day of June, 2006, the Claimant/Appellant ordered a driver to leave for the Airport at about 11:00am to convey the sum of Five Hundred Thousand ($500,000.00) United State Dollars equivalent of about Seventy Million (N70,000,000.00) Naira without any security or Police escort against normal practice (see Exhibit C). As it later turned out that fateful day, the driver was attacked and the money stolen. The Respondent reported the matter to the Police for their investigation and necessary action in accordance with the relevant laws of State. The Respondent, in addition and pursuant to the Disciplinary Procedure of the Respondent as contained in the extant employee handbook, Exhibit M or K issued a query to the Appellant which the Appellant replied, see Exhibit D. The Appellant was accordingly suspended in accordance with the employee?s Handbook, Exhibits K & M.