Nigerian Railway Corporation V. Mr. Patrick Nwanze (2007)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

NDUKWE-ANYANWU, J.C.A.

The proceedings leading to this appeal were initiated in the High Court of Bauchi State holding at Bauchi on the 28th January 2003. In that court the respondent as plaintiff claimed against the appellant then defendant by way of originating summons and claimed the following reliefs:

“(i) An order enforcing the Fundamental Human Right of the applicant to fair hearing under the 1979 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria (as amended), the African Charter on Human Rights, and 1999 Nigerian Constitution.

(ii) An order setting aside as null and void the defendant’s letter reference No. C/3297/5/1452 dated 30th August 1994 purportedly terminating the plaintiffs employment as same was done in breach of the plaintiffs fundamental Human Right to fair hearing under section 33 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1979 (as amended) and the African Charter on Human rights and 1999 Nigerian Constitution.

(iii) An order reinstating the plaintiff to his former employment with the defendant without prejudice to all arrears of salaries, allowances and promotion that might have accrued to him since then.”

This matter was tried on affidavit evidence. The trial Judge Hon. Justice I.M. Zango delivered his considered judgment on 15th December 2004.

The defendant now appellant being dissatisfied with the judgment appealed to this court.

The appellant filed its notice and five grounds of appeal. The appellant formulated five issues for determination namely thus:

“(1) Whether the trial Judge had jurisdiction over the appellant being a federal agency.

(2) Whether the court below did not err when it entertained the respondent’s claim by way of Fundamental Rights procedure instead of writ of summons, the action being one of master/servant relationship.

(3) Whether the affidavits are not in conflict which require oral testimony.

(4) Whether the trial court was not in error as regards master/servant relationship when it ordered the appellant to reinstate the respondent with his full entitlements, thereby forcing the respondent on the appellant.

(5) Whether the court below did not err in law and acted without jurisdiction when it entertained the respondent’s action which is statute barred.”

The respondent also formulated five issues for determination namely thus: –