Mr. A. N. Edjeme V. Nigerian National Petroleum Corporatton (2010)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report – COURT OF APPEAL

ALI ABUBAKAR BABANDI GUMEL, J.C.A (Delivering the Leading Judgment)

This is an appeal against the ruling of the Warri Division of the Delta State High court in Suit No. W265194 delivered on 27th May, 2004.

In an Amended Statement of claim dated 18th January, 1996, the Appellant, as the Plaintiff before the lower Court claimed for the following reliefs. They are: –

1) A declaration that the purported termination of Plaintiff’s contract of service with the Defendant view letter of termination reference No. AD/OER/C.2412 dated 4th November, 1993 given to the Plaintiff at Warri within the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court is invalid, wrongful and therefore null and void and of no effect whatsoever;

2) An order of this Honourable Court restraining the Defendant, its servants, agents, officers, privies or by whosoever from giving effect to the said letter of termination dated 4th November, 1993; and

3) An order reinstating the Plaintiff to this position of employment and payment thereof of all arrears of salaries and all entitlements attached to his employment from the date of the purported termination.

In alternative to the foregoing main reliefs, the Plaintiff/Appellant sought for the following reliefs: –

a) A declaration that the Plaintiff is entitled to retirement and pension benefits which accrued long before the purported termination calculated up till date of judgment; and

b) An order on the Defendant to calculate all the Plaintiff’s retirement or pension benefits from when he joined the civil service structure up till date of judgment as a Public Officer both in the State Civil Service and Federal Government Service.

In a statement of defence dated 15th May, 1996, the Defendant joined issues with the Appellant when it denied the key and material averments in the claim and prayed the lower Court to dismiss same for being vexatious, misconceived and abuse of process. For reasons which do not appear apparent from the record of appeal, trial could not start in this matter until 11th March, 2004 when the Plaintiff/Appellant opened his case when he gave oral evidence and tendered some documents in evidence. These documents include his letter of appointment, confirmation of appointment, promotions, approved conditions of service etc.

However, in a motion on notice dated 15th March, 2004 and filed on 17/03/04, the Defendant/Respondent sought for an order of the lower Court dismissing or striking out and/or abating the suit of the Plaintiff for being incompetent null and void for want of jurisdiction on the part of the Court to entertain its subject matter etc.

The ground for this application was set out thus: –

1. That by virtue of Decree 107 constitution (Suspension and Modification) Decree of 1993; the state High court racked jurisdiction to entertain this Suit; and
2. This suit is an abuse of process.

This application was supported by a 9 paragraph affidavit. To oppose this application the plaintiff, as the respondent, filed a 7 paragraph counter-affidavit. Issues having been duly joined; arguments on the motion started on 29/03/2004 and continued and ended on 6/04/2004.

In a very short ruling dated 27/05/04, the lower court held: –