Emenite Limited V. Chief Columbus E. Oleka (2004)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

OGEBE, J.C.A.

The respondent was employed by the appellant company in October, 1976. The appointment was to take effect from January, 1977. He rose through the ranks and became Finance Manager in August, 1989. The conditions of service governing the relationship between the respondent and the appellant is exhibit “G”.

In July, 1993, the appellant in re-organising the company decided to do away with the respondent’s appointment. The appellant used the word “disengagement” instead of termination.

The respondent was offered six months salary in lieu of notice.

This, he rejected and went to court before the High Court of Enugu State seeking the following declarations in an amended statement of claim:

“(a) Declaration that the defendant having made an offer of “disengagement” or “retirement” to the plaintiff outside the consensual conditions of service existing between both parties, the defendant is obliged to allow the plaintiff reasonable time to make a choice of the two options offered to him.

(b) Declaration that the defendant having on 14th July, 1993 made representation of intention to the plaintiff intended to affect their legal relations the defendant is estopped from resiling therefrom once the plaintiff has made his choice.

(c) Declaration that plaintiff having on 18th August, 1993, expressed his acceptance of early retirement as his method of withdrawal from defendant’s employment, the defendant is not only estopped from resiling therefrom but has to accept the plaintiff’s decision to retire from the defendant’s employment.

(d) Declaration that the defendant has no right to determine the service of the plaintiff on terms called “disengagement” which is outside the agreed conditions of service between the parties, and that the plaintiff is still in the employment of the defendant until the determination of this suit.

(e) Cancelled.

(f) Declaration that the option of “disengagement” offered by the defendant to the plaintiff is invalid as being outside the 1993 conditions of service.”

The appellant filed a statement of defence admitting the fact of employment but denied the claim of wrongful termination. At the trial court, the respondent gave evidence and tendered several documents including the conditions of service, exhibit “G” and the letter of “disengagement”, exhibit “L”.

The appellant called the Chairman of his Board of Directors, one Mr. Paul Ezenwa Nwokolo to testify on its behalf. He gave evidence that the respondent’s appointment with the appellant was terminated. He stated that they used the word “disengagement” in order not to embarrass the respondent. He agreed that the respondent was entitled to be treated in accordance with the conditions of service, exhibit “G”.

The trial court gave judgment in favour of the respondent in respect of some of his reliefs especially, relief 12(a) which had the effect of placing the respondent in the employment of the appellant until the Day of Judgment.