SCC Nigeria Limited & Ors v. David George & Ors (2024)

LAWGLOBAL HUB Lead Judgment Report – SUPREME COURT

ABUBAKAR SADIQ UMAR, JSC (Delivering the leading judgment)

This is an appeal against the judgment of the Court of Appeal, Abuja Judicial Division wherein the court dismissed the appellants appeal against the judgment of the High Court of the FCT which found in favour of the 1st respondents application for enforcement of his fundamental rights against the appellants and the 2nd respondent.

Brief statement of facts

The 1st respondent as the applicant commenced the suit that gave rise to this appeal at the High Court of the FCT against the appellants and the 2nd respondent as 1st-3rd respondents under the Fundamental Right Enforcement Procedure Rules. He prayed for the following reliefs:

A. A declaration that the allegation of theft, arrest and handing over of the applicant to the 3rd respondents by the 1st and 2nd respondents and without evidence whatsoever was capricious, unwarranted, wrongful, unconstitutional and a breach of the applicant’s right to personal liberty.

B. A declaration that the harassment, intimidation, humiliation and arrest of the applicant by the 1st and 2nd respondents on trump up allegation of theft without proof was plotted and executed by the 1st and 2nd respondent to blackmail the applicant in order to justify the applicant’s subsequent sack from the 1st respondent’s employment and is therefore unjustifiable, wicked and malicious.

C. A declaration that the detention of the applicant by the 3rd respondent for four days (30th November to 3rd December, 2014) at the Bwari Police Station without investigation or prosecution is unlawful, unconstitutional, illegal, unwarranted and a violation of the applicants right to personal liberty.

D. A declaration that the act of the respondents in arresting and detaining the applicant for four days on the allegation of theft without charging the applicant to court amounts to false imprisonment and thus a violation of the applicants right to personal liberty.

E. An order of this honourable court awarding the sum of N1000,000 (One Million Naira) only in favour of the applicant against the respondents jointly and severally for false imprisonment arising from the humiliation, embarrassment, intimidation, unsubstantiated allegation of theft, unlawful arrest and detention of the applicant from the 30th November to the 3rd December, 2014 without trial.

F. An order restraining the 3rd respondent, its officers, servants, agents or howsoever named from further violating the applicants right to personal liberty secured and guaranteed under section 35(1) of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria as amended and under the African Charter on Human and Peoples Right.

In response, the appellants filed a preliminary objection premised on sections 254C(1)(d) and 251(1) (p) (q) (r) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 as amended; that it is either the National Industrial Court or the Federal High Court and not the High Court of FCT that has jurisdiction to hear the 1st respondents claim. The appellants also filed a counter-affidavit in opposition to the suit. The 1st respondent filed a reply address to the appellants preliminary objection and a reply on point of law to the appellants counter-affidavit in opposition to the suit.

The case of the 1st respondent is that he was employed by the 1st appellant as a labourer in 2003 and he was later promoted to the position of a generator attendant. He worked meritoriously for the 1st appellant to the extent of being rewarded in the year 2013 with colour TV and awarded Certificate of Long Service having worked for Ten years. On Sunday November 30th 2014 while he was on night duty at the 1st appellants Generator House around 11pm, the 2nd appellant who is the 1st appellants Chief Security Officer and one Mr. Nwachukwu another 1st appellants Chief Security Officer in charge of Kubwa site came into his room. The 2nd appellant claimed that two trucks entered the premises of the 1st appellant. He told the 2nd appellant that he did not see any truck enter the premises but the 2nd appellant insisted that he must produce the trucks. He was later arrested together with one Mr. Kabiru Ibrahim, after which the 2nd appellant took the two of them to Bwari Divisional Police Station. The I.P.O. one Mr. Okpanachi wrote his statement for him and tried to force him to own up but he refused. He maintained his position that he did not see any truck enter the 1st appellants premises. He was detained for alleged theft from the 30th November, 2014 to the 3rd December, 2014 when he was taken to court in company of others. He and the other persons were not eventually arraigned and were returned to police station. He was granted bail and his appointment was terminated. The 1st respondent thereafter filed the suit that led to this appeal alleging that the appellants infringed on his right by arresting him and taking him to police before lodging any complaint and that the 2nd respondent (the police) just detained him without doing any investigation about the allegation leveled against him thereby infringing on his fundamental right to personal liberty.

The appellants case before the trial court as borne out of their counter-affidavit is that the 2nd appellant as the Chief Security Officer in charge of the 1st appellants site got a tip-off that there was a plan by some of the 1st appellants staff to steal finished pipe and raw materials at the 1st appellants factory in Bwari, Abuja between the midnight of 30th November, 2014 and 1st December, 2014. The 2nd appellant and one Mr. Nwachukwu laid ambush at the entrance of the 1st appellants premises. A few minutes later, two trucks drove into the 1st appellant premises. They immediately ran into the premises to enter. After identifying themselves to the gate man the gate was still not open until about five minutes later. When they entered and walked towards the said truck, the driver drove away. They noticed that there were several persons hiding in the darkness around the premises of the factory. They caught one of them who turned out to be a police officer. They took him to the Bwari Divisional Police and when he made statement, he mentioned several staff of the 1st appellant including the 1st respondent who connived with him.

After hearing the parties, the learned trial Judge overruled the appellants preliminary objection. He also found in favour of the 1st respondents claim and accordingly granted reliefs A, C, and D reproduced above. On appeal, the lower court affirmed the decision of the trial court and therefore dismissed the appeal. The appellants being further dissatisfied have filled this appeal against the decision of the lower court.