Dantata & Sawoe Construction Company Ltd. V. Angulu Ibrahim (2003)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

ZAINAB A. BULKACHUWA, J.C.A.

The respondent a former employee of the appellant commenced this Suit before the FCT High Court Abuja against the appellant whereby in Suit No. FHCjHC/CV/169/95 wherein he claimed against the appellants the following reliefs vide the Writ of Summons filed on the 26th of April, 2001;

“The Plaintiffs claim is for;

1. A declaration that his purported dismissal or suspension (if any) from the employment of the defendant company is null void and of no effect.
2. A declaration that the Plaintiff is still in the employment of Dantata and Sawoe Nigeria Ltd.
3. An order directing the defendant company to reinstate the plaintiff to his status as a driver without prejudice to entitlements and promotions which, ought to have accrued to him during the said period and/or payment of his salary for the said period.
4. Cost of this action. And in an amended statement of claim vide paragraph 19 thereof, the respondent further claimed against the appellant company the sum of N1,000,000.00 (One Million Naira only) damages for false imprisonment and wrongful termination appointment.

Pleadings were duly filed and exchanged. The respondent adduced evidence and closed his case on the 7/5/97. After series of adjournment and on the oral application of Counsel for the respondent the appellant’s case was closed on the 1/12/97 and respondent’s Counsel addressed the court thereafter and the case was adjourned to the 28/1/98 for judgment. Appellant filed a Motion of Notice on the 9/1/98 seeking for an order of extention of time within which the defendant can defend the suit. The motion was never moved before the court and on the 12/3/98 the lower court delivered judgment for N52,810.00 as damages against the appellant.

The appellant being aggrieved has now appealed to this court on these grounds of appeal which are produced hereunder;

GROUND OF APPEAL:

1. The learned trial judge erred in law when he refused to hear the appellant’s Motion on Notice seeking leave to defend the Suit before giving his judgment.

PARTICULARS:

(i) The appellant’s Motion of Notice of 4/12/97 seeking for leave to defend the Suit filed on the 9/1/98 long before the trial court’s judgment of 13/3/98

(ii) The trial court ought to hear and rule on the said Motion before delivering its judgment in the Suit.

(iii) The appellant is entitled to hear (sic) on the said, motion before judgment can be entered against him in the suit.

2. The learned trial judge erred in law by denying the appellant his right of fair hearing when he did not give counsel the opportunity to address the court in the case before giving judgment.

PARTICULARS:

(i) The appellant was entitled to address the court after its case was closed by the trial court.

(ii) The appellant was not given the opportunity to address the court before judgment in the case was delivered.

3. The learned trial judge erred in law by awarding N50,000 to the respondent for unlawful prosecution when;

i) The Respondent in this amended Statement of Claim claimed N1,000,000.00 damages against the appellant for false imprisonment and wrongful termination.