Borishade V. Nigerian Bank of Nigeria Ltd. (2005)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

MONICA BOLNA’AN DONGBAN-MENSEM, J.C.A.

On the 24th May, 2001, the Hon. Justice, A. Acho Ogbonna of the Port Harcourt Judicial Division holden at Port Harcourt dismissed the suit of the Plaintiff/Appellant for the failure of the Plaintiff to prove his case as required by law. The learned trial Judge concluded the judgment in these terms:

“… am satisfied that the Plaintiff’s dismissal is not unlawful…”

The Plaintiff, herein after referred to as the Appellant, has come before this Court seeking a reversal of the decision of the trial Court.

Briefly, the suit of the Appellant before the trial Court was for wrongful dismissal by his employee, the Respondent.

The Appellant was employed in 1980. He rose progressively through the ranks to the enviable position of a Branch Manager before his employment was terminated in 1991 at the instance of the Respondent upon some allegations of misconduct.

Before the trial Court, the Appellant sought the following reliefs:

i. A declaration that the purported dismissal of the Plaintiff from the service of the defendant as a Branch Manager Contained in the Defendants; letter reference AP/A, 420/320 dated 8th November 1991 is contrary to the provisions of the Collective Agreement between the plaintiff and Defendant.

ii. An order of Court setting aside the said letter of dismissal.

iii. A declaration that the Plaintiff is still an employee of the Defendant.

iv. An order of Court restraining the Defendant or its agents; from giving effect to the said letter of dismissal.

v. In the alternative:

The Plaintiff claims the sum of N500,000.00 (Five Hundred Thousand Naira) as general damages for wrongful dismissal in that by a letter dated 18th November 1991 the Defendant purported to have dismissed the Plaintiff when the said letter is contrary to the Collective Agreement binding the Plaintiff and the Defendant.

At the conclusion of testimonies, the learned Counsel for each side addressed the Court. It was at this state that the learned Counsel for the Appellant withdrew reliefs 2, 3, & 4 of the suit.