Summarize
IN THE NATIONAL INDUSTRIAL COURT OF NIGERIA
IN THE YOLA JUDICIAL DIVISION
HOLDEN AT YOLA
BEFORE HIS LORDSHIP HON. JUSTICE J.T.
AGBADU FISHIM
5TH
DECEMBER, 2024
SUIT
NO: NICN/YL/07/2015
BETWEEN:
JUGDGEMENT
1. HON. RIMANTARI ALABURAH
2. HON. DANAZUMI AGBU
3. HON. IDIMALI DANFULANI
4. HON. ISAAC D. DANBAKI
5. HON. MAIGANDI KAIGAMA
6. HON. NASHUKA EPENYA
7. HON. DANIEL LUKA
8. HON. MATHIAS D. AUDU
9. HON. BITRUS D. YAKUBU
10. HON. HELLARY KAIGAMA
11. HON. ADAMU IDI TUKURA
12. HON. TUKURA USMAN
13. HON. MOHAMMED LALLO
14. HON. CALEB B. TABSI
CLAIMANTS
15. HON. ELISHA ASUKUSE I.
16. HON. ISHAYA DIMAS DILA
17. HON. JUSTINE ATHANATIUS
18. HON. TANIMU MUHAMMED DANLELE
19. HON. MOHAMMED A. KARIM
20. MR. INNOCENT BALA KONA
21. MR. GIDEON ULU
22. HON. POLYCARP SAMA
23. ALH. UMAR SALIHU LAMIDO
24. ALH. YAHUZA YAYA’U
25. HON. SADANU H. GALADIMA
26. MR. ISA ALIYU
27. HON. HARUNA UMRU
28. MR. YUSUF ZAFI
29. HON. ARONCIN GACHUNG
30. HON. SILAS MADAKI
31. HON. HABILA DAVID ANGYU
32. MR. SOLOMON GANAH
33. MACDONALD DOGOSON
34. HON. ALH. HAMZA ASHU
35. MR. AHMED ABDULLAHI
36. HON. MARKUS A. AUTA
37. HON. AUDU BALA
38. HON. YAKUBU F. L. SUVALA
39. HON. ADAMU AHMADU
40. HON.ABUBAKAR USMAN
41. HON. SANUSI SO M. SAMBO
42. HON. IBRAHIM ABDULLAHI
(DAN-MINISTER)
43. HON. SOLOMON GATI AYUBA
44. HON. MISA TRAICE
45. HON. ASABE ABUBAKAR
46. HON. AYIBSAE S. IRASE
47. HON. MATHIAS KAMBA
48. HON. CLETUS YOHANNA
49. HON. ALEX APAKE ISTIFANUS
50. HON. IBRAHIM YAHAYA CHIROMA
51. HON. ALKASIM MUHAMMED MAGAJI
52. HON. DAJUMA B. PASSALI
53. HON. UMAR SANUSI YAKUBU
54. HON.ZUBAIRU ABDULLAHI
55. HON. HARUNA ABDULLAHI
56. HON. TASUI A. MAGAJI
57. HON. JOHN PHILIP
58. HON. FRIDAY BULUS
59. HON. SHUAIBU DAHIRU
60. HON. NOAH T. BENDOUAH
61. HON. JACOB ADAMU DONGA
62. HON. ELISHA RIMAMSHONG
63. HON. STALEN AYUBA
64. HON. DAVORO K. TITUS
65. HON. ISA S. MASA-IBI
66. HON. DEAN BILL BLAZON
67. HON. IBRAHIM BABPA MUHAMMED
68. HON. MUHAMMED BALA ADAMU
69. HON. BUBA BABA BOSE
70. HON. ESTHER SOLOMON ABDULLAHI
71. HON. ALIYU TUKUR
72. HON. NASIR MUHAMMED TUKUR
73. HON. SAMILA UMARU
74. HON. MARKUS NYGINIUS
75. HON. MAHMUD AUDU
76. HON. MAHMUD ABUBAKAR
77. HON. TANIMU YAKUBU
78. HON. FADIMATU SULEI TANKO
79. HON. MAHAMMED BUBA
80. HON. AKUWU NJIDDA
81. HON. BELLO ADAMU WAKILI
82. HON. AUTA DANJI SEFOR
83. HON. CALVIN JONATHAN
84. HON MURKAR USMAN
85. HON. SHEHU ALI TANKO
86. HON. NUYEBA GAMBO SUNTAYI
87. HON. MUSA D. USMAN
88. HON. MAMUDA BALA
89. HON. UAVER GWAZA GIDEON
90. HON. MUHAMMED ADAMU
91. HON. NASIRU ALHATU
92. HON. ALIYU MOHAMMED
93. HON. ROHDA ISHAYA
94. HON. REGINA NGANGE
95. HON. AWALU HALILU
96. HON. TANKO DULDE
97. HON. DANLADI MUSA
98. HON. VICTORIA JONSON
99. HON. MUSTAPHA ADAMU
100.HON. AMINU MOHAMMED CHUL
101. HON. DAUDA MISA
102. HON. HUSSAINI SHENU AJI
103. HON. ABDULAZEEZ SHUAIBU
KARKO
104. HON. KABIRU AHMED MAKERAN
105. HON. AMINU MOHAMMED PAPAPA
106. HON. MUSA A. TUTARE
107. HON. SAIDU A. SHUAIBU
108. HON. HOSSIA SWENJI
109. HON. JOHN IWEKWEGHI
110. HON. DALHATU Y. MUHAMMED
111. HON. ABE M. ZAKU
112. HON. MAHMUDA A. UBANDOMA
113. HON. STEPHEN D. OBADIAH
114. HON. KULU GAMBO
115. HON. IBRAHIM TANKO
116. HON. MURTALA MAIRIGA
117. HON. BILYAMINU BELLO
118. HON. REJOICE DANIS
119. HON. ADAMU ABUBAKAR
GALADIMA
120. HON. MUHAMMED GIDADO
121. HON. IBRAHIM GAYYA
122. HON. SHUAIBU ABUBAKAR
YELWA
123. HON. SULIEMAN ADAMU
124. HON. ZAINAB MANU
125. HON. WILLIAM PAUL MAIGIDA
126. HON. HABU JOSEPH USMAN
127. HON. AMOS HAMIDU
128. HON. ILIYA PHILEMON ILIYA
129. HON. HARUNA EZEKIEL
130. HON. CHRISTOPHER AYUBA
131. HON. APIRUWA ROSE HUMFRE
132. HON. SOLOMON TELA
133. HON. DANLADI AMOS
134. HON. KAPEYA GAJI
135. HON. JOHN UMAR
136. HON. MUHAMMED ABUBAKAR
137. HON. DIMAS MASHI
138. HON. SOLOMI GARBA
139. HON. EMMANUEL D. UMAR
140. HON. UMAR SALI JAJA
141. HON. ADAMU USHIRIM
142. HON. ABDULLAHI CHANGKWI
143. HON. UMAR ISA
144. HON. BABARAI NASURU
145. HON. MUSA B. JIBO
146. HON. JIBO ABUBAKAR BELLO
147. HON. WANNA PATRICK
148. HON. GWAH LAWRE
149. HON. NZUWE PHILIP THIOPINE
150. HON. EMMANUEL ATIKU
151. HON. AMINU A. UMAR
152. HON. SIMON UTAN UKUBE
153. HON. BABA BARNABAS
154. HON. ANDREW TITUS
155. HON. IBRAHIM SULEBAGI
156. HON. ALEXANDER ADAMU
157. HON. GIDEON AYUBA IKPI
158. HON. RIMKATEN KEFAS
159. HON. KURUTSI ENOCH
160. HON. DAVID DANBEKI
161. HON. RIMTSAB JOHN
162. HON. TOMAS Y. ANDE
163. HON. JAMES R. YANDE
164. HON. STANLEY AYUBA
165. HON. NASIRU SAIDU
166. HON. AMOS J. MAGO
167. HON. SUVAH BARAU
168. HON. MATHAI YESEVORO
169. HON. HABILA VOYAMBA
170. HON. BARNABAS NTARI
171. HON. JOHN KOTARI
172. HON. ABDULLAHI MASHI
173. HON. HASSAN K. HAUSA
174. HON. JAMES NYADAN
175. HON. OBADIAH NAGORO
176. HON. YOHANNA WALLAH
177. HON. STEPHEN MAYAKA
178. HON. FAYI GIBSON
179. HON. ISHAY J. TELLI
180. HON. ZULLADEEN YAHAYA
181. HON. MATHAIS A. BIBONG
182. HON. ISA S. MASA-IBI
183. HON. HABU MIKAILA
184. HON. KOTAKU JOSEPH
185. HON. IBRAHIM ZAKARI
186. HON. DANIEL DANASABE
187. HON. EMMANUEL I. GANI
188. HON. DANASABE NUSERI
189. HON. MATSWENDE BAKO
190. HON. DEAN BILL BLASON
191. HON. BARAU LEONE
192. HON. DANJUMA MOHAMMED
193. HON. DAUDA DIMAS
194. HON. ADO UMAR KASSA
195. HON. MU’AZU YUSUF
196. HON. AFTIKUS ELISHA
197. HON. ALI KANDA
198. HON. YAHAYA UMAR
199. HON. FAROUK I. PITIKO
200. HON. BILYAMINU ADE
201. HON. HASSAN ADAMU
202. HON. MAGAJI BELLO
203. HON. PATRICK TABA
204. HON. THOMAS NAGATI
205. HON. MUSTAPHA A. MUSA
206. HON. EMMANUEL YUSUF
207. HON. MOSES SAAKU
208. HON. SHUAIBU ABDULLAHI
WORBO
209. HON. IBRAHIM AHMED
210. HON. HABILA HABU
211. HON. AONDOHEMBA AERNYE
212. HON. IRIMIYA OBADIAH
213. HON. UZEIRU IDI
214. HON. YAKUBU GARJILA
215. HON. ISHAKU JOSEPH SHAMAKI
216. HON. HAYATU HAMMANGABDO
217. HON. YAKUBU ABBO
218. HON. ABBA A. LAWAL
219. HON. YAKUBU G. GARBABI
220. HON. MALAM BAKO ABBA
221. HON. MUSA ISA
222. HON. APEZAN RICHARD
MBATREREM
223. HON. USMAN YUSUF GASSOL
224. HON. IDRIS IBRAHIM
225. HON. MUHAMMED T. GARBA
226. HON. UZEIRU S. HAMMAN
227. HON. ABDULAZIZ KISHIMI
228. HON. JONNAH AZUNGWA
229. HON. IBRAHIM IDI MAITO
230. HON. AKILU DALHATU AKILU
231. HON. YAKUBU DAMA
232. HON. HUSSAINI DODO
233. HON. JOLY ELISHA
234. HON. ARMAYAU MOHAMMED
235. HON. ALBERT ALI DOGARI
236. HON. AGABUS HASSAN MAIKIDI
237. HON. USENI JAKA
238. HON ALI SULE
239. HON. JONAH JATUA
240. HON. DANJUMA NOCK
241. HON. AYUBA AMOS
242. HON. HAURE AMOS
243. HON. ABDU SHUMEN KAUDA
244. HON. ABDULAH A. UMAR
245. HON. UMAR SALLAMU
246. HON. YAU DANFULANI
247. HON. JONSON DEDFA
248. HON. SAJO BAKARI
249. HON. ABDULRASHID MUSA
250. HON. YAKUBU BULUS
251. HON. SAMUILA AUDU
253. HON. EMMAMNUEL YANGORGA
254. HON. SOLOMON ALU
255. HON. TANKO JORO
256. HON. USENI AMOS MAMAKI
257. HON. NABOTH KINDENBEN
258. HON. DANJUMA ARAKI
259. HON. UMARU IRASKEP
260. HON. BENJAMIN S. MAGO
261. HON. A’ARON J. MAZANS
262. HON. TITUS MAGO
263. HON. LUKA YUNANA
264. HON. IBRAHIM ILIYASU
265. HON. CHRISTIAN A. KOTONTI
266. HON. ABDULKARIM A. SAMARI
267. HON. PAUL MAZAN KWANTI
268. HON. BABANDI MUSTAPHA
269. HON. AMOS SALEH
270. HON. IDRIS IBRAHIM
271. HON. MUSA YAKUBU
272. HON. JONATHAN DANLADI
273. HON. DANJI ASHUKU UMAR
274. HON. POLYCAP TSOKWA
275. HON. AUWAL YAKUBU
276. HON. KABIRU ABUBAKAR
277. HON. SIMON BABANI
278. HON. KYARE BABARI
279. HON. SAHALU YUNUSA
280. HON. SULIEMAN CHIDO JIRU
281. HON. COSMON NZURAI
282. HON. DOMNIC BUKUNIC
283. HON. BABANGIDA JUNGUDO
BOKA
284. HON. YAKUBU Y. MASHI
285. HON. KAMALUDEEN EL-WAKILI
286. HON. KARFWA DAUDA
287. HON. BILKISU DANLADI
288. HON. MISA SALASA
289. HON. BENJAMI YAKUBU WAZIRI
290. HON. MAIMUNA E. NWUNJI
291. BADAMASI BALA
292. HON. MANASSEH BEMUA
293. HON. DAUDA AHMADU
294. HON. UDI DANLADI
295. HON. SALAMU MAZADIN
296. HON. DAHIRU USMAN
297. HON. IBRAHIM ALI
298. HON. UMMUL BABA
299. HON. BAB ABANA
300. HON. AUDU BUBA KANTOMA
GASSON
301. HON. ALH. BELLO LIMAN
302. HON. HARUNA MUHAMMED DAJA
SHAGARDA
303. HON. YAHUZA USMAN WAROJAM
304. PASTOR BULUS YARIMA
305. HON. USMAN ZUBERU
306. HON. TEFA AKOKO
307. HON. BALA DANLADI
308. HON. ABDULLAHI USEINI
309. HON. AUWAL SANI KWAYA
310. HON. ABDUARZAK HALILU
311. HON. ALH SANI BABAN BAKO
312. HON. KUSHELIA BOSS
313. HON. IBRAHIM USMAN
314. HON. MOHAMMED OKASHATU
315. HON. MUSA USMAN
316. HON. MIKAI EZEKIEL
317. HON. SULIE KESAN
318. HON. JONATHAN DANIEL AKIA
319. HON. EPHRAIM HOSEA
320. HON. PETER JULIUS VAU
321. HON. SAMUEL SANVORO
322. HON. YAKUBU HAMMAN
323. HON. VICTORIA AMOS
324. HON. ISA ISMAIL
325. HON. MOHAMMED PETSI
326. HON. BELBO
327. HON. ANDREW YOYO
328. HON.EMMANUEL NDAMVUOH
329. HON. BRIAN KWULBE
330. HON. DANLAMI Y. WAKILI
331. HON. GARLEYA AUDU
332. HON. PATRICK GAMJE
333. HON. ILIYASU ABDULLAHI
TULLU
334. HON. YUNISA A.A. MAIGORO
335. HON. RIMANDE PHILIBUS
336. HON. RIMAMANDE FILIBUS
337. HON. SULE HASSAN
338. HON. RIMTSIWE RIKA
339. HON. YESUFU AROMNZE
340. HON. ABALIS MAIGARI ISA
341. HON. ALICE DANIEL
342. HON. FLORENCE OBIDAH
343. HON. MARAFA ZANI
344. HON. PATRICK SANYA
345. HON. RICHARD VOSUKURE
346. HON. JOSEPH LEMAVS
347. HON. ABDULLAHI AUDU
348. HON. OBADIAH SUNDAY MAGAJI
349. HON. WERE AHMED DOSA
350. HON. IBRAHIM BAKO TSOKWA
351. HON. YAKUBU UMARU
352. HON. JULIUS MGEGAM
353. HON. WAPUKHEN DADASABE
354. HON. RAYMOND AGBU
355. HON. JIBRIN MANU DANLADI
356. HON. VERONICA IDI MALI
357. HON. NASIRU ALI
358. HON. ASABE CHIN ALI
AND
1. THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TARABA
2. THE GOVERNMENT OF TARABA STATE
3. THE COMMISSIONER FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENT AND
CHIEFTAINCY AFFAIRS
4. ARDO-KOLA LOCAL GOVERNMENT AREA OF TARABA STATE
5. BALI LOCAL GOVERNMENT AREA OF TARABA STATE
6. DONGA LOCAL GOVERNMENT AREA OF TARABA STATE
7. GASHAKA LOCAL GOVERNMENT AREA OF TARABA STATE
8. GASSOL LOCAL GOVERNMENT AREA OF TARABA STATE DEFENDANTS
9. IBI LOCAL GOVERNMENT AREA OF TARABA STATE
10. JALINGO LOCAL GOVERNMENT AREA OF TARABA STATE
11. KARIM – LAMIDO LOCAL GOVERNMENT AREA OF
TARABA STATE
12. KURMI LOCAL GOVERNMENT AREA OF TARABA STATE
13. LAU LOCAL GOVERNMENT AREA OF TARABA STATE
14. SARDAUNA LOCAL GOVERNMENT AREA OF TARABA STATE
15. TAKUM LOCAL GOVERNMENT AREA OF TARABA STATE
16. USSA LOCAL GOVERNMENT AREA OF TARABA STATE
17. WUKARI LOCAL GOVERNMENT AREA OF TARABA STATE
18. YORRO LOCAL GOVERNMENT AREA OF TARABA STATE
19. ZING LOCAL GOVERNMENT AREA OF TARABA STATE
LEGAL REPRESENTATION:
Ibrahim K. Bawa SAN, FClArb,
for all the Claimants. With him are Desmond S. Adebole Esq, Saraffa Yusuf Esq,
R.M. Agav Esq, J.W Pensur Esq, and Vasty Bulus Esq.
C.D. Abongaby Esq, for all the
Defendants. With him are C.D. Abongaby Jnr Esq Miss Anita Sule Esq, E.C. Uwakwe
Esq, and U.A Abdullahi Esq.
JUDGMENT
1. The Claimants filed this suit on the 31st August, 2015. By a
further amended complaint, the Claimants claims against the Defendants jointly
and severally are as follows:
a. WHEREOF the 1st Claimant who was elected as a Councilor and
later made the leader of Takum Local Government Council, Taraba State, claims
from the defendants jointly and severally the sum of N2,144,874.60k (Two
Million, One Hundred and Forty Four Thousand Eight Hundred and Seventy four
Naira, Sixty Kobo) as severance gratuity and the sum of N2,144,874.60k (Two
Million, One Hundred and Forty Four Thousand Eight Hundred and Seventy four
Naira, Sixty Kobo) as furniture allowance, making the total claim of the 1st
claimant N4,289,749.02k of N2,144,874.60k (Four Million, Two Hundred and Eight
Nine Thousand Seven Hundred and Forty Nine Naira, Two Kobo)
b. WHEREOF EACH of the 2nd and 3rd claimants who were elected
as chairmen of Karim Lamido and Wukari Local Government Councils, claims from
the defendants jointly and severally the sum of N3,113,239.32k (Three Million,
One Hundred and Thirteen Thousand, Two Hundred and thirty Nine Naira, Thirty
Two Kobo) as severance gratuity, making the total claim of EACH of the 2nd and
3rd Claimants N3,113,239.32k (Three Million, One Hundred and Thirteen Thousand,
Two Hundred and thirty Nine Naira, Thirty Two Kobo)
c. WHEREOF EACH of the 4th – 20th claimants who were elected
as vice-chairmen of their various Local Government Councils, claims from the
defendants jointly and severally the sum of N2,671,131.60 k (Two Million, Six Hundred
and Seventy One Thousand, One Hundred and Thirty One Naira, Sixty Kobo) as
furniture allowance, making the total claim of EACH of the 4th – 20th claimants
N5,342,263. 20 k (Five Million, Three Hundred and Forty Two Thousand, Two
Hundred and Sixty Three Naira, Two Kobo) as severance gratuity, and the sum
of N1,335,44.76K (One Million, Three
Hundred and Thirty Five Thousand, Three Hundred and Forty Four Naira, Seventy
Six Kobo) as furniture allowance, making the total claim of EACH of the 21st –
35th Claimants N2,670,689.52K (Two Million, Six Hundred and Seventy Thousand,
Six Hundred and Eighty Nine Naira, Fifty Two Kobo).
d. WHEREOF EACH of the 21st – 35th Claimants who were appointed
as Secretaries of their various Local Government Councils, claims from the
defendants jointly and severally the sum of N1,335,344.76 k (One Million, Three
Hundred and thirty Five Thousand, Three Hundred and Forty Four Naira, Seventy
Six Kobo) as severance gratuity and the sum of N1,335,344.76 k (One Million,
Three Hundred and thirty Five Thousand, Three Hundred and Forty Four Naira,
Seventy Six Kobo) as furniture allowance, making the total claim of EACH of the
21st – 35th claimants N2,670,689. 52 k (Two Million, Six Hundred and Seventy
Thousand, Six Hundred and Eighty Nine Naira, Fifty Two Kobo).
e. WHEREOF EACH of the 36th – 50th claimants who were elected
as Councilors, but later made them leaders of their various Local Government
Councils, claims from the defendants jointly and severally the sum of
N2,144,874. 60k (Two Million, One Hundred and Forty Four Thousand, Eight
Hundred and Seventy Four Naira, Sixty Kobo) as severance gratuity and the sum
of N2,144,384.60k (Two Million, One Hundred and Forty Four Thousand, Eight
Hundred and Seventy Four Naira, Sixty Kobo) as furniture allowance, making the
total claim of EACH of the 36st – 50th claimants N4,289,749.2k (Four Million,
Two Hundred and Eighty Nine Thousand, Seven Hundred and Forty Nine Naira, Two
Kobo).
f. WHEREOF EACH of the 51st – 66th claimants who were elected
as Councilors, but later made them deputy leaders of their various Local
Government Councils, claims from the defendants jointly and severally the sum
of N2,004,750. 00 (Two Million, Four Thousand, Seven Hundred and Fifty Naira.)
as severance gratuity and the sum of N2,004,750.00 (Two Million, Four Thousand,
Seven Hundred and Fifty Naira) as furniture allowance, making the total claim
of EACH of the 51st – 66th claimants N4,009,500.00 (Four Million, Nine
Thousand, Five Naira).
g. WHEREOF EACH of the 67th – 199th claimants who were elected
as members of their various Local Government Councils as Councilors, claims
from the defendants jointly and severally the sum of N1,973,145.84 k (One
Million, Nine Hundred and Seventy Three Thousand, One Hundred and Forty Five
Naira, Eighty Four Kobo) as severance gratuity and the sum of N1,973,145.84k
(One Million, Nine Hundred and Seventy Three Thousand, One Hundred and Forty
Five Eighty Four Kobo) as furniture allowance, making the total claim of EACH
of the 200th – 275th claimants N3,973,691. 68k (Three Million, Nine Hundred and
Forty Six Thousand, Six Hundred and Ninety One Naira, Sixty Eight Kobo).
h. WHEREOF EACH of the 21st – 35th claimants who were appointed
as Supervisory Councilors of their various Local Government Councils, claims
from the defendants jointly and severally the sum of N1,325,244.76 k (One
Million, Three Hundred and Twenty Five Thousand, Two Hundred and Forty Four
Naira, Seventy Six Kobo) as severance gratuity and the sum of N1,325,244.76 k
(One Million, Three Hundred and Twenty Five Thousand, Two Hundred and Forty
Four Naira, Seventy Six Kobo) as furniture allowance, making the total claim of
EACH of the 200th – 275th claimants N2,650,489. 52 k (Two Million, Six Hundred
and Fifty Thousand, Four Hundred and Eighty Nine Naira, Fifty Two Kobo).
i. WHEREOF EACH of the 276th – 358th claimants who were
appointed as Special advisers of their various Local Government Councils,
claims from the defendants jointly and severally the sum of N912,091,32k (Nine
Hundred and Twelve Thousand, Ninety One Naira, Thirty Two Kobo) as severance
gratuity and the sum of N912,091,32k (Nine Hundred and Twelve Ninety One Naira,
Thirty Two Kobo) as furniture allowance, making the total claim of EACH of the
276th – 358th claimants N1,824,182. 00 (One Million, Eight Hundred and Twenty
Four Thousand, One Hundred and Eighty Two Naira).
j. WHEREOF the total claims of the against the defendants
jointly and severally is the sum of N1,157,894,754.60k (One Billion Two Hundred
and Forty Five Million, Sixty Five Thousand, Four Hundred and Fifty Five
Naira).
k. The sum of N2,000,000.00 (Two Million Naira) being general
damages for EACH of the Claimants.
2. CLAIMANTS’ STATEMENT OF FACTS ESTABLISHING THE CAUSE OF
ACTION
a. The Claimants case is that they reside in various wards of
the Sixteen (16) Local Government Areas of Taraba State within the jurisdiction
of this Honuorable Court.
b. The 1st Defendant is the Chief Law Officer of Taraba State
with his office at the State Secretariat, Jaligo, Taraba State. The 2nd Defendant’s
office is Government House, Jaligo, Taraba State within the jurisdiction of
this Honourable Court.
c. The 3rd Defendant is the commissioner for Local Government
and Chieftaincy Affairs, Taraba state with his office at the bureau for Local
Government and Chieftaincy Affairs, Jalingo, Taraba State within the
jurisdiction of this Honourable court.
d. The Claimants aver that they all served in different
capacities as Vice-Chairman, secretaries, leaders, deputy leader, elected
councilors, supervisory Councilors and special advisers in fourteen (14) Local
Government areas of Taraba state excluding Wukari and Karim Lamido Local
Government Areas from May, 2012 to May, 2015 and from August, 2010 to August,
2013.
e. The Claimants aver that some of the Claimants also served in
different capacities as Chairmen, Vice-Chairmen, secretaries, leaders, deputy
leaders, elected councilors, supervisory councilors and special advisers in
Wukari and Karim Lamido Local Government Areas from August, 2010 to August
2013.
f. The Claimants aver that the 1st claimant who is the
Chairman of their forum served as the leader of Takum Local Government council.
The 2nd and 3rd Claimants served as Chairmen of Karim Lamido and Wukari Local
Government Councils, the 4th -20th claimants served as Vice-Chairmen in the 16
local government areas of Taraba state, the 21st- 35th Claimants served as
secretaries and the 36th – 50th Claimants who were elected as Councilors served
as the leaders of their various Local Government councils.
g. The Claimants further aver that the 51st – 66th Claimants
who were elected as Councilors served as the deputy leaders of their various
local government councils. The 76th -199th Claimants served as legislative
Councilors. The 200th – 275th Claimants served as supervisory councilors, while
the 276th -358th claimants served as special advisers.
h. The claimants aver that the 1st – 199th claimants were all
issued with certificates of return by the Taraba State Independent Electoral
Commission (TSIEC) upon emerging victorious in the elections conducted by the
commission. The 200th – 358th Claimants were all duly appointed as supervisory
councilors, special advisers and secretaries in their Local Government areas
and appointment letter were issued to them accordingly. This enabled them to
serve in that capacity. The Claimants certificates of return and appointment
letters are hereby pleaded
i. The Claimants aver that upon the completion of their tenure
in August, 2013 and May, 2015 respectively, they are entitled to be paid
severance gratuities and furniture allowance of various categories depending on
the level/capacity each of them served.
j. The Claimants aver that their names, post, Local
Governments and the amount each of them is entitled to as severance gratuities
and furniture allowance are herein tabulated below.
3. ARDO-KOLA
LOCAL GOVERNMENT AREA
S/N NAMES POST FURNITURE ALLOWANCE SEVERANCE GRATUITY
1. HON. ISAAC D. DANBAKI VICE/CHAIRMAN N2,671,131.60 N2,671,131.60
2. MR INNOCENT BALA KONA SECRETARY N1,335,344.76 N1,335,344.76
ELECTED COUNCILORS
3. HON. MARKUS A. AUTA LEADER N2,144,874.60 N2,144,874.60
4. HON. ALKASIM MUHAMMED MAGAJI DEP/LEADER N2,004,750.00 N2,004,750.00
5. HON. IBRAHIM BAPPA MUHAMMED ELEC.
MEMBER N1,973,145.84 N1,973,145.84
6. HON. MARKUS NYGINUS ELEC.
MEMBER N1,973,145.84 N1,973,145.84
7. HON. MAHDU AUDU ELEC.
MEMBER N1,973,145.84 N1,973,145.84
8. HON. MAHDU ABUBAKAR ELEC.
MEMBER N1,973,145.84 N1,973,145.84
9. HON. TANIMU YAKUBU ELEC.
MEMBER N1,973,145.84 N1,973,145.84
10. HON. FADIMATU SULE ELEC.
MEMBER N1,973,145.84 N1,973,145.84
11. HON. MAHAMMED BUBA ELEC.
MEMBER N1,973,145.84 N1,973,145.84
12. HON. AKUWU NJIDDA ELEC.
MEMBER N1,973,145.84 N1,973,145.84
13. HON. BELLO ADAMU WAKILI ELEC.
MEMBER N1,973,145.84 N1,973,145.84
SUPERVISORY COUNCILORS
14. HON. MUSTAPHA A. MUSA N1,325,244.76 N1,325,244.76
15. HON. EMMANUEL YUSUF N1,325,244.76 N1,325,244.76
16. HON. MOSES SAAKU N1,325,244.76 N1,325,244.76
17. HON. SHUAIBU ABDULLAHI WURBO N1,325,244.76 N1,325,244.76
18. HON. IBRAHIM AHMED N1,325,244.76 N1,325,244.76
SPECIAL ADVISERS
19. KAMALUDEE EL-WAKIL N912,091.32 N912,091.32
20. KAFWA DAUDA N912,091.32 N912,091.32
21. BALKISU DANLADI N912,091.32 N912,091.32
22. MISA SALANSA N912,091.32 N912,091.32
23. BENJAMIN ISHAKU WAZIRI N912,091.32 N912,091.32
4. DONGA
LOCAL GOVERNMENT AREA
S/N NAME POST FURNITURE ALLOWANCE SEVERANCE GRATUITY
1. HON. NASHUKA EPENYA VICE/CHAIRMAN N2,671,131.60 N2,671,141.60
2. HON. POLYCARP SAMA SECRETARY N1,335,344.76 N1,335,344.76
ELECTED COUNCILOR
3. HON. YAKUBU F.L. SUVALA LEADER N2,144,874.60 N2,144,874.60
4. HON. UMAR SANUSI YAKUBU DEP/LEADER N2,004,750.00 N2,004,750.00
5. HON. AUTA DANJI SEFOR ELEC.
MEMBER N1,973,145.84 N1,973,145.84
6. HON. CALVIN JONATHAN ELEC.
MEMBER N1,973,145.84 N1,973,145.84
7. HON. MUKAR USMAN ELEC.
MEMBER N1,973,145.84 N1,973,145.84
8. HON. SHEHU ALI TANKO ELEC.
MEMBER N1,973,145.84 N1,973,145.84
9. HON. NUYEBA GAMBOSUNTAI ELEC.
MEMBER N1,973,145.84 N1,973,145.84
10. HON. MUSA D. USMAN ELEC.
MEMBER N1,973,145.84 N1,973,145.84
11. HON. MAMUDA BALA ELEC.
MEMBER N1,973,145.84 N1,973,145.84
12. HON. UAVER GWAZA GIDEON ELEC.
MEMBER N1,973,145.84 N1,973,145.84
SUPERVISORY COUNCILORS
13. HON. HABILA HABU N1,325,244.76 N1,325,244.76
14. HON. AONDOHEMBA AERNYI N1,325,244.76 N1,325,244.76
15. HON. IRIMIYAOBADIAH N1,325,244.76 N1,325,244.76
16. HON. UZEIRUIDI N1,325,244.76 N1,325,244.76
17. HON. YAKUBU GARJILA N1,325,244.76 N1,325,244.76
SPECIAL ADVISERS
18. HON.MAIMUNA E. NWUNJI N912,091.32 N912,091.32
19. HON.BADAMASI BALA N912,091.32 N912,091.32
20. HON.MANASSEH BEMUA N912,091.32 N912,091.32
21. HON.DAUDA AHMADU N912,091.32 N912,091.32
22. HON.UDI DANLADI N912,091.32 N912,091.32
5. GASHAKA
LOCAL GOVERNMENT AREA
S/N NAMES POST FURNITURE
ALLOWANCES SEVERANCE
GRATUITY
1. HON.
DANIEL LUKA VICE/CHAIRMAN N2,671,133.60 N2,671,133.60
2. ALH. UMAR SALIHU LAMIDO SECRETARY N1,335,344.76 N1,335,344.76
ELECTED COUNCILLORS
3. HON. ADAMU AHMADU LEADER N2,144,874.60 N2,144,874.60
4. HON. ZUBAIRU ABDULLAHI DEP/LEADER N2,004,750.00 N2,004,750.00
5. HON. MUHAMMEDADAMU ELEC. MEMBER N1,973,145.84 N1,973,145.84
6. HON.
NASIRU DALATU ELEC. MEMBER N1,973,145.84 N1,973,145.84
7. HON.
ALIYU MUHAMMED ELEC. MEMBER N1,973,145.84 N1,973,145.84
8. HON.
RHODA ISHAYA ELEC. MEMBER N1,973,145.84 N1,973,145.84
9. HON.
REGINA NGANGE ELEC. MEMBER N1,973,145.84 N1,973,145.84
10. HON.
AUWALU HALILU ELEC. MEMBER N1,973,145.84 N1,973,145.84
11. HON.
TANKO JULDE ELEC. MEMBER N1,973,145.84 N1,973,145.84
12. HON
DANLADI MUSA ELEC. MEMBER N1,973,145.84 N1,973,145.84
SUPERVISORY COUNCILORS
13. HON. ISHAKU JOSEPH SHAMAKI N
1,325,244.76 N 1,325,244.76
14. HON.HAYATU HAMMANGABDO N1,325,244.76 N 1,325,244.76
15. HON. YAKUBU ABBO N1,325,244.76 N 1,325,244.76
16. HON. ABBA A. LAWAL N1,325,244.76 N 1,325,244.76
17. HON. YAKUBU G. GARBABI N1,325,244.76 N 1,325,244.76
SPECIAL ADVISERS
18. HON. SALAMU MAZADIN N
912,091.32 N 912,091.32
19. HON. DAHIRU USMAN N
912,091.32 N 912,091.32
20. HON. IBRAHIM ALI N
912,091.32 N 912,091.32
21. HON. UMMUL BABA N
912,091.32 N 912,091.32
22. HON. BAB ABANA N
912,091.32 N 912,091.32
6. GASSOL LOCAL
GOVERNMENT AREA
S/N NAMES POST FURNITURE
ALLOWANCES SEVERANCE
GRATUITY
1. HON. MATHIAS D. AUDU VICE/CHAIRMAN N2,671,131.60 N
2,671,131.60
2. ALH YAHUZA YAYA'U SECRETARY N1,335,344.76 N
1,335,344.76
ELECTED COUNCILORS
3. HON. ABUBAKAR USMAN LEADER N 2,144,874.60 N 2,144,874.60
5. HON. VICTORIA JOHNSON ELEC.
MEMBER N 1,973,145.84 N 1,973,145.84
6. HON. MUSTAPHA ADAMU ELEC.
MEMBER N 1,973,145.84 N 1,973,145.84
7. HON.AMINU UHAMMED CHUL ELEC.
MEMBER N 1,973,145.84 N 1,973,145.84
8. HON. DAUDA MISA ELEC.
MEMBER N 1,973,145.84 N 1,973,145.84
9. HON. HUSSEINI SHENU AJI ELEC.
MEMBER N 1,973,145.84 N 1,973,145.84
10. HON. ABDULAZEEZ SHUAIBU GARKO ELEC.
MEMBER N 1,973,145.84 N 1,973,145.84
11. HON. KABIRU AHMED MAKERA ELEC.
MEMBER N 1,973,145.84 N 1,973,145.84
12. HON. AMINU MOHAMMED PAPAPA ELEC.
MEMBER N 1,973,145.84 N 1,973,145.84
13. HON. MUSA A. TUTARE ELEC.
MEMBER N,325,244.76 N,325,244.76
14. HON.
SAIDU A. SHUAIBU ELEC. MEMBER N,325,244.76 N,325,244.76
SUPERVISORY COUNCILORS
18 HON. USMAN YUSUF GASSOL N
1,325,244.76 N 1,325,244.76
19 HON. IDRIS IBRAHIM N
1,325,244.76 N 1,325,244.76
SPECIAL ADVISERS
20 HON. AUDU BUBAKANTOMA
GASSOL N 912,091.32 N912,091.32
21 HON. ALH BELLO LIMAN N
912,091.32 N912,091.32
22 HON.HARUNA MUHAMMED DAJA SHAGARDA N 912,091.32 N912,091.32
23 HON YAHUZA USMAN WUROJAM N
912,091.32 N 912,091.32
24 PASTOR BULUS YERIMA N
912,091.32 N 912,091.32
7. IBI
LOCAL GOVERNMENT AREA
S/N NAMES POST FURTURE ALLOWANCE SEVERANCE GRATUITY
1 HON. BITRUS D.YAKUBU VICE/CHAIRMAN N 2,671,131.60 N 2,671,131.60
2 HON. SADANU H.GALADIMA SECRETARY N 1,335,344.76 N
1,335,344.76
ELECTED COUNCILORS
3 HON. SANUSI M. SAMBO LEADER N 2,144,874.60 N 2,144,874.60
4 HON. TASIU A. MAGAJI DEP/LEADER N 2,004,750.00 N 2,004,750.00
5 HON. HOSEA FWENJI ELEC.
MEMBER N 1,973,145.84 N 1,973,145.84
6 HON. JOHN IWEKWAGHI ELEC.
MEMBER N 1,973,145.84 N 1,973,145.84
7 HON. DALHATU Y. MUHAMMED ELEC.
MEMBER N 1,973,145.84 N 1,973,145.84
8 HON. ABE M. ZAKU ELEC.
MEMBER N 1,973,145.84 N 1,973,145.84
9 HON. MAMUDA A. UBANDOMA ELEC.
MEMBER N 1,973,145.84 N 1,973,145.84
10
HON. STEPHEN D. ELEC. MEMBER N
1,973,145.84 N 1,973,145.84
11 HON. KULU GAMBO ELEC.
MEMBER N 1,973,145.84 N 1,973,145.84
12 HON. IBRAHIM TANKO ELEC.
MEMBER N 1,973,145.84 N 1,973,145.84
SUPERVISORY COUNCILORS
13 HON. MUHMMAED T.GARBA N
1,325,244.76 N 1,325,244.76
14 HON. UZEIRU S.HAMMAN N
1,325,244.76 N 1,325,244.76
15 HON. ABDULAZIZ KISHIMI N
1,325,244.76 N 1,325,244.76
16 HON. JONNAH AZUNGWA N
1,325,244.76 N 1,325,244.76
17 HON. IBRAHIM IDI MAITO N
1,325,244.76 N 1,325,244.76
SPECIAL ADVISERS
18 HON. USMAN ZUBERU N
912,091.32 N 912,091.32
19 HON. TEFA AKOKO N
912,091.32 N 912,091.32
20 HON. BALA DANLADI N
912,091.32 N 912,091.32
21 HON. ABDULAHI USEINI N
912,091.32 N 912,091.32
22 HON. AUWAL SANI KWAYA N
912,091.32 N 912,091.32
8.
JALINGO LOCAL GOVERNMENT AREA
S/N NAMES POST FURNITURE
ALLOWANCES SEVERANCE
GRATUITY
1 HON. HELLARY KAIGAMA VICE/CHAIRMAN N 2,671,131.60 N 2,671,131.60
2 MR. ISA ALIYU SECRETARY N 1,335,344.76 N
1,335,344.76
ELECTED COUNCILORS
3 HON. IBRAHIM ABDULLAHI LEADER N 2,144,874.60 N 2,144,874.60
4 HON. JOHN PHILP DEP/LEADER N 2,004,750.00 N 2,004,750.00
5 HON. MURTALA MAIRIGA ELEC.
MEMBER N 1,973,145.84 N 1,973,145.84
6 HON. BILYAMINU BELLO ELEC.
MEMBER N 1,973,145.84 N 1,973,145.84
7 HON. REJOICE DANIS ELEC.
MEMBER N 1,973,145.84 N 1,973,145.84
8 HON. AMADU ABUBAKAR ELEC.
MEMBER N 1,973,145.84 N 1,973,145.84
9 HON. MUHAMMED GIDADO ELEC.
MEMBER N 1,973,145.84 N 1,973,145.84
10 HON. IBRAHIM GAYYA ELEC.
MEMBER N 1,973,145.84 N 1,973,145.84
11 HON. SHUIBU ABUBAKAR YELWA ELEC.
MEMBER N 1,973,145.84 N 1,973,145.84
12 HON. SULIEMAN ADAMU ELEC.
MEMBER N 1,973,145.84 N 1,973,145.84
SUPERVISORY COUNSILORS
13 HON. AKILU DALHATU AKILU N
1,325,244.76 N 1,325,244.76
14 HON. YAKUBU DAMA N
1,325,244.76 N 1325,244.76
15 HON. HUSSAINI DODO N
1,325,244.76 N 1325244.76
16 HON. JOLY ELISHA N
1,325,244.76 N 1325244.76
17 HON. ARMAYAU MOHAMMED N
1,325,244.76 N 1,325,244.76
SPECIAL ADVISERS
18 HON. ABDURAZAK HALILU N
912,091.32 N 912,091.32
19 HON. ALH SANI BABANBOKO N
912,091.32 N 912,091.32
20 HON. KUSHELIA BOSS N
912,091.32 N 912,091.32
21 HON. IBRAHIM USMAN N
912,091.32 N 912,091.32
22 HON. MOHAMMED OKASHATU N
912,091.32 N 912,091.32
9. KURMI
LOCAL GOVERNMENT AREA
S/N NAME POST FURNITURE ALLOWANCE SEVERANCE GRATUITY
1. HON.
ADAMU IDI TUKURA VICE/CHAIRMAN N 2,671,131.60 N 2,671,131.60
2 HON. HARUNA UMARU SECRETARY N 1,335,344.76 N
1,335,344.76
ELECTED COUNCILORS
3 HON.
APIRUWA ROSE HUMFRE ELEC. MEMBER N 1,973,145.84 N 1,973,145.84
4 HON. SOLOMON GATI LEADER N 2,144,874.60 N 2,144,874.60
5 HON. FRIDAY BULUS DEP/LEADER N 2,004,750.00 N 2,004,750.00
6 HON. ZAINAB MANU ELEC.
MEMBER N 1,973,145.84 N 1,973,145.84
7 HON. WILLIAM PAUL ELEC.
MEMBER N 1,973,145.84 N 1,973,145.84
8 HON. HABU JOSEPH ELEC.
MEMBER N 1,973,145.84 N 1,973,145.84
9 HON. AMOS HAMIDU ELEC.
MEMBER N 1,973,145.84 N 1,973,145.84
9 HON. ILIYA PHILEMON ILIYA ELEC.
MEMBER N 1,973,145.84 N 1,973,145.84
10 HON. HARUNA EZEKIEL ELEC.
MEMBER N 1,973,145.84 N 1,973,145.84
11 HON. CHRISTOPHER AYUBA ELEC.
MEMBER N 1,973,145.84 N 1,973,145.84
SUPERVISORY COUNCILORS
12 HON.ALBERT ALI DOGARI HUMFRE N
1,325,244.76 N 1,325,244.76
13 HON. USENI JAKA N
1,325,244.76 N 1,325,244.76
14 HON. ALI SULE N
1,325,244.76 N 1,325,244.76
15 HON. JONAH JATAU N
1,325,244.76 N 1,325,244.76
16 HON. AGABUS HASSAN MAIKIDI N
1,325,244.76 N 1,325,244.76
SPECIAL ADVISERS
17 HON. MIKAH EZEKIEL N
912,091.32 N 912,091.32
18 HON. SULE KESAN N
912,091.32 N 912,091.32
19 HON. JONATHAN DANIEL AKIA N
912,091.32 N 912,091.32
20 HON. MUSA USMAN N
912,091.32 N 912,091.32
21 HON. EPHRAIM HOSEA N
912,091.32 N 912,091.32
10. LAU
LOCAL GOVERNMENT AREA
S/N NAMES POST FURNITURE ALLOWANCE SEVERANCE GRATUITY
1 HON. TUKURA USMAN VICE/CHAIRMAN N 2,671,131.60 N 2,671,131.60
2 MR YUSUF ZAFI SECRETARY N 1,335,344.76 N
1,335,344.76
ELECTED COUNCILORS
3 HON. MISA TRAICE LEADER N 2,144,874.60 N 2,144,874.60
5 HON. SHUAIBU DAHIRU DEP/LEADER N 2,004,750.00 N 2,004,750.00
6 HON. SOLOMON TELA ELEC.
MEMBER N 1,973,145.84 N 1,973,145.84
7 HON. DANLADI AMOS ELEC.
MEMBER N 1,973,145.84 N 1,973,145.84
8 HON. KAFIYA GAJI ELEC.
MEMBER N 1,973,145.84 N 1,973,145.84
9 HON. JOHN UMAR ELEC.
MEMBER N 1,973,145.84 N 1,973,145.84
10 HON MUHAMMED ABUBAKAR ELEC.
MEMBER N 1,973,145.84 N 1,973,145.84
11 HON. DIMAS MASHI ELEC.
MEMBER N 1,973,145.84 N 1,973,145.84
12 HON. SALOMI GARBA ELEC.
MEMBER N 1,973,145.84 N 1,973,145.84
13 HON. EMMANUEL D. UMAR ELEC.
MEMBER N 1,973,145.84 N 1,973,145.84
SUPERVISORY COUNCILORS
14 HON. DANJUMA NOCK N
1,325,244.76 N 1,325,244.76
15 HON. AYUBA AMOS N
1,325,244.76 N 1,325,244.76
16 HON. HAURE DIMAS N
1,325,244.76 N 1,325,244.76
17 HON. ABDU SHUMEN KAUDA N
1,325,244.76 N 1,325,244.76
18 HON ABDULAH A. UMAR N
1,325,244.76 N 1,325,244.76
SPECIAL ADVISERS
19 HON.PETER JULIUS VAU N
912,091.32 N 912,091.32
20 HON.SAMUEL SANVORO N
912,091.32 N 912,091.32
21 HON.YAKUBU HAMMAN N
912,091.32 N 912,091.32
22 HON.VICTORIA AMOS N
912,091.32 N 912,091.32
23 HON. ISA ISMAIL N
912,091.32 N 912,091.32
11. SARDAUNA
LOCAL GOVERNMENT AREA
S/N NAME POST FURNITURE ALLOWANCE SEVERANCE GRATUITY
1 HON. MOHAMMED LALLO VICE/CHAIRMAN N2,671,131.60 N2,671,131.60
2 MR. ARONCIN GACHUNG SECRETARY N1,335,344.76 N
1335344.76
ELECTED COUNCILLORS
3 HON. ASABE ABUBAKAR LEADER N2,144,874.60 N 2,144,874.60
4 HON. NOAH T. BELDUAH DEP/LEADER N2,004,750.00 N 2,004,750.00
5 HON. ADAMU USHIRIM ELEC.
MEMBER N1,325,244.76 N 1,325,244.76
6 HON. ABDULLAHI CHANGKWI ELEC.
MEMBER N1,325,244.76 N 1,325,244.76
7 HON. UMAR ISA ELEC.
MEMBER N1,325,244.76 N 1,325,244.76
8 HON. BABRAI NASURU ELEC.
MEMBER N1,325,244.76 N 1,325,244.76
9 HON. MUSA B. JIBO ELEC.
MEMBER N1,325,244.76 N 1,325,244.76
10 HON. JIBO ABUBAKAR BELLO ELEC.
MEMBER N1,325,244.76 N 1,325,244.76
11 HON. WANNA PATRICK ELEC.
MEMBER N1,325,244.76 N 1,325,244.76
12 HON. GWAH LAWRE ELEC.
MEMBER N1,325,244.76 N 1,325,244.76
13 HON.
UMAR SALI JAJA ELEC. MEMBER N1,325,244.76 N 1,325,244.76
SUPERVISORY COUNCILORS
14 HON. YAU DANFULANI N1,325,244.76 N 1,325,244.76
15 HON. JOHNSON DEDEFA N1,325,244.76 N 1,325,244.76
16 HON.SAJO BAKARI N1,325,244.76 N 1,325,244.76
17 HON.ABDULLRASHID MUSA N1,325,244.76 N 1,325,244.76
18 HON.SPECIAL
ADVISERS
19 HON.MOHAMMED PETSI N 912,091.32 N 912,091.32
20 HON.SILENCE D. BELBO N
912,091.32 N 912,091.32
21 HON.ANDREW YOYO N
912,091.32 N 912,091.32
22 HON.EMMANUEL DAMVUOH N
912,091.32 N 912,091.32
23 HON.
UMAR SALLAMU N
912,091.32 N 912,091.32
24 HON.BRIAN KWULDE N
912,091.32 N 912,091.32
12. TAKUM LOCAL
GOVERNMENT AREA
S/N NAMES POST FURNITURE
ALLOWANCES SEVERANCE GRATUITY
1 HON. CALEB B. TABSI VICE/CHAIRMAN N2,671,131.60 N
2,671,131.60
2 HON. SILAS MADAKI SECRETARY N 1,335,344.76 N
1,335,344.76
ELECTED COUNCILLORS
3 HON.RIMAMTARI ALBURAH LEADER N 2,144,874.60 N 2,144,874.60
4 HON. JACOB ADAMU DONGAH DEP/LEADER N 2,004,750.00 N 2,004,750.00
5 HON.NZUWE PHILIPS THIOPINE ELEC.
MEMBER N1,973,145.84 N 1,973,145.84
6 HON.EMMANUEL ATIKU ELEC.
MEMBER N 1,973,145.84 N 1973145.84
7 HON.AMINU A. UMAR ELEC.
MEMBER N 1,973,145.84 N 1,973145.84
8 HON.SIMON UTAN UKUBE ELEC.
MEMBER N 1,973,145.84 N 1973145.84
9 HON.BABA BARNABAS ELEC.
MEMBER N 1,973,145.84 N 1,973,145.84
10 HON.ANDREW TITUS N
1,973,145.84 N 1973145.84
11 HON.IBRAHIM SULEBAGI ELEC.
MEMBER N 1,973,145.84 N 1,973,145.84
12 HON.ALEXENDER ADAMU ELEC.
MEMBER N 1,973,145.84 N 1,973,145.84
13 HON.GIDION AYUBA IKPI ELEC.
MEMBER N 1,973,145.84 N 1,973,145.84
SUPERVISORY COUNCILORS
14 HON.YAKUBU BULUS N
1,325,244.76 N 1,325,244.76
15 HON.SAMUILA AUDU N
1,325,244.76 N 1,325,244.76
16 HON.EMMANUEL YANGORGA N
1,325,244.76 N 1,325,244.76
17 HON.SOLOMON ALU N
1,325,244.76 N 1,325,244.76
18 HON.TANKO JORO N
1,325,244.76 N 1,325,244.76
19 HON.SPECIAL ADVISERS
20 HON.DANLAMI Y.WAKILI N
912,091.32 N 912,091.32
21 HON.GARLEYA AUDA N
912,091.32 N 912,091.32
22 HON.PATRICK GAMJE N
912,091.32 N 912,091.32
23 HON.ILIYASU ABDULAHI TULLU N
912,091.32 N 912,091.32
24 HON.INUSA A.A. MAIGORO N 912,091.32 N 912,091.32
13. USSA
LOCAL GOVERNM3NT AREA
S/N NAMES POST FURNITURE ALLOWANCE SEVERANCE GRATUITY
1 HON. ELISHA ASUKUSE I. VICE/CHAIRMAN N 2,671,131.60 N 2,671,131.60
2 HON. HABILA DAVID ANGYU SECRETARY N 1,335,344.76 N
1,335,344.76
ELECTED COUNCILLORS
3 HON. AYIBSAE S. IRASE LEADER N 2,144,874.60 N 2,144,874.60
4 HON. ELISHA RIMAM SHONG DEP/LEADER N 2,004,750.00 N 2,004,750.00
5 HON. RIMAM KYATEN KEFAS ELEC.
MEMBER N1,973,145.84 N 1,973,145.84
6 HON. KURUTSI ENOCH ELEC.
MEMBER N1,973,145.84 N 1,973,145.84
7 HON. DAVID DANBEKI ELEC.
MEMBER N 1,973,145.84 N 1973145.84
8 HON. RIMAMTSAB JOHN ELEC.
MEMBER N 1,973,145.84 N 1,973145.84
9 HON. THOMAS Y. ANDE ELEC.
MEMBER N 1,973,145.84 N 1973145.84
10 HON. JAMES R. YANDE ELEC.
MEMBER N 1,973,145.84 N 1,973,145.84
SUPERVISORY COUNCILORS
11 HON. USENI AMOS MAMAKI N
1,325,244.76 N 1,325,244.76
12 HON. JERIMIAH ANDEFIN N
1,325,244.76 N 1,325,244.76
13 HON. NABOTH KINDEBEN N
1,325,244.76 N 1325,244.76
14 HON. DANJUMA ARAKI N
1,325,244.76 N 1,325,244.76
15 HON. UMARU IRASKEP N
1,325,244.76 N 1,325,244.76
SPECIAL ADVISERS
16 HON. RIMAMNDE FILIBUS N
912,091.32 N 912,091.32
17 HON. SHATA DANLADI N
912,091.32 N 912,091.32
18 HON.KURUTSI NABOTH N
912,091.32 N 912,091.32
19 HON. RIMAMTSIWE RIKA N
912,091.32 N 912,091.32
20 HON. YESUFU ARUMNZE N
912,091.32 N 912,091.32
14. YORRO LOCAL
GOVERNMENT AREA
S/N NAMES POST FURNITURE ALLOWANCE SEVERANCE GRATUITY
1 HON. ISHAYA DIMAS DILA VICE/CHAIRMAN N 2,671,131.60 N 2,671,131.60
2 MR SOLOMON GANAH
SECRETARY N 1,335,344.76 N 1,335,344.76
ELECTED COUNCILORS
3 HON. MATHIAS KAMBA LEADER N 2,144,874.60 N 2,144,874.60
4 HON. STANLEY AYUBA DEP/LEADER N 2,004,750.00 N 2,004,750.00
5 HON. NASIRU SAIDU ELEC.
MEMBER N 1,973,145.84 N 1,973,145.84
6 HON. AMOS J. MAGO ELEC.
MEMBER N 1,973,145.84 N 1,973,145.84
7 HON. SUVAH BARAU ELEC.
MEMBER N 1,973,145.84 N 1,973,145.84
8 HON. MATHIAS YESEVORO ELEC.
MEMBER N 1,973,145.84 N 1,973,145.84
9 HON. HABILA VOYAMBA ELEC.
MEMBER N 1,973,145.84 N 1,973,145.84
10 HON. BARNABAS Y. NTARI ELEC.
MEMBER N 1,973,145.84 N 1,973,145.84
11 HON. JOHN KOTARI ELEC.
MEMBER N 1,973,145.84 N 1,973,145.84
12 HON. ABDULLAHI MASHI ELEC.
MEMBER N 1,973,145.84 N 1,973,145.84
13 HON. HASSAN K. HAUSA ELEC.
MEMBER N 1,973,145.84 N 1,973,145.84
SUPERVISORY COUNCILORS
14 HON. BENJAMIN S. MAGO N
1,325,244.76 N 1,325,244.76
15 HON. A'ARON J. MAZANS N
1,325,244.76 N 1,325,244.76
16 HON. TITUS MAGO N
1,325,244.76 N 1,325,244.76
17 HON. LUKA YUNANA N
1,325,244.76 N 1,325,244.76
18 HON. IBRAHIM ILIYASU N
1,325,244.76 N 1,325,244.76
SPECIAL ADVISERS
19 HON. ABALIS MAIGARI ISA N
912,091.32 N 912,091.32
20 HON. ALICE DANIEL N
912,091.32 N 912,091.32
21 HON. FLORENCE OBIDAH N
912,091.32 N 912,091.32
22 HON. MARAFA ZANI N
912,091.32 N 912,091.32
23 HON. PATRICK SANYA N
912,091.32 N 912,091.32
15. ZING
LOCAL GOVERNMENT AREA
S/N NAMES POST FURNITURE ALLOWANCE SEVERANCE GRATUITY
1 HON. JUSTINE ATHANATIUS VICE/CHAIRMAN N 2,671,131.60 N 2,671,131.60
2 HON.MACDONALD DOGOSON SECRETARY N 1,335,344.76 N
1,335,344.76
ELECTED COUNCILORS
3 HON. CLETUS YOHANNA LEADER N 2,144,874.60 N 2,144,874.60
4 HON. DAVORO K. TITUS DEP/LEADER N 2,004,750.00 N 2,004,750.00
5 HON. JAMES NYADAN ELEC.
MEMBER N 1,973,145.84 N 1,973,145.84
6 HON. OBIDAH NAGORO ELEC.
MEMBER N 1,973,145.84 N 1,973,145.84
7 HON. YOHANNA WALLAH ELEC.
MEMBER N 1,973,145.84 N 1,973,145.84
8 HON. STEPHEN MAYAKA ELEC.
MEMBER N 1,973,145.84 N 1,973,145.84
9 HON. FAYI GIBSON ELEC.
MEMBER N 1,973,145.84 N 1,973,145.84
10 HON. ISHAY J. TELLI ELEC.
MEMBER N 1,973,145.84 N 1,973,145.84
11 HON. ZULLADEEN YAHAYA ELEC.
MEMBER N 1,973,145.84 N 1,973,145.84
12 HON. MATHIAS A. BIBONG ELEC.
MEMBER N 1,973,145.84 N 1,973,145.84
SUPERVISORY COUNCILORS
13 HON. CHRISTAIN A. KOTONTI N
1,325,244.76 N 1,325,244.76
14 HON. ABDULKARIM A. SAMARI N
1,325,244.76 N 1,325,244.76
15 HON. PAUL MAZAN KWANTI N
1,325,244.76 N 1,325,244.76
16 HON. BABANDI MUSTAPHA N
1,325,244.76 N 1,325,244.76
17 HON. AMOS SALEH N
1,325,244.76 N 1,325,244.76
SPECIAL ADVISERS
18 HON.RICHARD VOSUKURE N
912,091.32 N 912,091.32
19 HON.JOSEPH LEMAS N
912,091.32 N 912,091.32
20 HON.ABDULLAHI AUDU N
912,091.32 N 912,091.32
21 HON. OBADIAH SUNDAY MAGAJI N
912,091.32 N 912,091.32
22 WERE AHMED DOSA N
912,091.32 N 912,091.32
16. WUKARI
LOCAL GOVERNMENT AREA
S/N NAMES POST FURNITURE
ALLOWANCES SEVERANCE
GRATUITY
1 HON DANAZUMI AGBU CHAIRMAN N 3,113,239.32 N
3,113,239.32
2 HON TANIMU MUHAMMED VICE/CHAIRMAN N 2,671,131.60 N 2,671,131.60
3 HON ALH.HAMZA ASHU SECRETARY N 1,335,344.76 N
1,335,344.76
ELECTED COUNCILORS
4 HON ALEX APAKE ISTIFANUS LEADER N 2,144,874.60 N 2,144,874.60
5 HON ISA S. MASA-IBI DEP/LEADER N 2,004,750.00 N 2,004,750.00
6 HON HABU MIKAILA ELEC.
MEMBER N 1,973,145.84 N 1,973,145.84
7 HON KOTAKU JOSEPH ELEC.
MEMBER N 1,973,145.84 N, 1973,145.84
8 HON IBRAHIM ZAKARI ELEC.
MEMBER N 1,973,145.84 N 1,973,145.84
9 HON DANIEL DANASABE ELEC.
MEMBER N 1,973,145.84 N 1,973,145.84
10 HON EMMANUEL I. GANI ELEC.
MEMBER N 1,973,145.84 N 1,973,145.84
11 HON DANASABE NUSERI ELEC.
MEMBER N 1,973,145.84 N 1,973,145.84
SUPERVISORY COUNCILORS
14 HON. MUSA YAKUBU N
1,325,244.76 N1,325,244.76
15 HON. JONATHAN DANLADI N
1,325,244.76 N1,325,244.76
16 HON. DANJI ASHUKU UMAR N
1,325,244.76 N1,325,244.76
17 HON. POLYCARP TSOKWA N
1,325,244.76 N1,325,244.76
18 HON. IDRIS IBRAHIM N
1,325,244.76 N1,325,244.76
SPECIAL ADVISERS
19 HON. YAKUBU UMARU N
912,091.32 N 912,091.32
20 HON. JULIUS MGEGAM N
912,091.32 N 912,091.32
21 HON. WAPUKHEN DANASABE N
912,091.32 N 912,091.32
22 HON. RAYMOND AGBU N
912,091.32 N 912,091.32
23 HON.IBRAHIM BAKOTSOKWA N
912,091.32 N 912,091.32.
17. KARIM
LAMIDO LOCAL GOVERNMENT AREA
S/N NAMES POST FURNITURE
ALLOWANCES SEVERANCE
GRATUITY
1 HON. IDIMALI DANFULANI CHAIRMAN N 3,113,239.32 N
3,113,239.32
2 HON. MOHAMMED A. KARIM VICE/CHAIRMAN N 2,671,131.60 N 2,671,131.60
3 MR AHMED ABDULLAHI SECRETARY N 1,335,344.76 N
1,335,344.76
ELECTED COUNCILLORS
4 HON. IBRAHIM YAHAYA CHIROMA LEADER N 2,144,874.60 N 2,144,874.60
5 HON. DEAN BILL BLASON DEP/LEADER N 2,004,750.00 N 2,004,750.00
6 HON. BARAU LEONE ELEC.
MEMBER N 1,973,145.84 N 1,973,145.84
7 HON. DANJUMA MOHAMMED ELEC.
MEMBER N 1,973,145.84 N 1,973,145.84
8 HON. DAUDA DIMAS ELEC.
MEMBER N 1,973,145.84 N 1,973,145.84
9 HON. ADO UMAR KASSA ELEC.
MEMBER N 1,973,145.84 N 1,973,145.84
10 HON. MU'AZU YUSUF ELEC.
MEMBER N 1,973,145.84 N 1,973,145.84
11 HON. AFTIKUS ELISHA ELEC.
MEMBER N1,973,145.84 N 1,973,145.84
12 HON. ALI KANDA ELEC.
MEMBER N 1,973,145.84 N 1,973,145.84
13 HON. YAHAYA UMAR ELEC.
MEMBER N 1,973,145.84 N 1,973,145.84
14 HON. FAROUK PITIKO ELEC.
MEMBER N 1,973,145.84 N 1,973,145.84
SUPERVISORY COUNCILLORS
15 HON. AUWAL YAKUBU N
1,325,244.76 N 132524476
16 HON. KABIRU ABUBAKAR N
1,325,244.76 N 1,325,244.76
17 HON. SIMON BABANI N
1,325,244.76 N 1,325,244.76
18 HON. KYARI BABARI N
1,325,244.76 N 1325,244.76
19 HON. SAHALU YUNUSA N
1,325,244.76 N 1,325,244.76
SPECIAL ADVISERS
20 HON. JIBRIN MANU DANLADI N
912,091.32 N 912,091.32
21 HON. MARTHA YAKUBU N
912,091.32 N 912,091.32
22 HON. VERONICA IDI MALI N
912,091.32 N 912,091.32
23 HON. MASIRU ALI N
912,091.32 N 912,091.32
24 HON. ASABA CHIN ALI N
912,091.32 N 912,091.32
18. The Claimants aver that they were all duly elected and
appointed. Thereafter, they were sworn into office. The Claimants aver that
they completed their tenure as Chairmen, Vice-Chairmen, secretaries, leaders,
deputy leaders, elected Councilors, supervisory Councilors and special advisers
successfully and meritoriously.
19. The Claimants aver that by virtue of the provisions of the
Political and Public Office Holders of the Local Government of the States
(Remuneration and other Benefits) (Amendment No. 3) Law, 2008 they are entitled
to severance gratuities upon the completion of their tenure in August, 2013 and
May, 2015 respectively. The furniture allowance is supposed to be paid during their
tenure.
20. The Claimants aver that since the completion of their tenure,
in spite of repeated demands (oral and documentary) by the claimants to the
offices of the Executive Governor of Taraba State, the Speaker of the Taraba
State House of Assembly and the Chairman House Committee on Chieftaincy
Affairs, the respective offices failed, refused and/or neglected to accede to
their demand.
21. The Claimants aver that entreaties made by prominent indigenes
of Taraba State on their behalf to persuade the Defendants to pay the severance
gratuities and furniture allowance proved abortive.
22. The Claimants aver that pursuant to the inaction of the
offices afore-stated in Paragraph 14, they formed a forum known as the
"Ex-Chairmen and between May, 2012- May, 2015 and August, 2010 - August,
2013". The Claimants as executive members. The forum was saddled with the
responsibility to use viable and legal means to recover the Claimants’
benefits.
23. The Claimants aver that the forum engaged the services of the law
firm of Messrs Desmond S. Adebole & Co. to write letters of demand to law
of the defendants on behalf of the Claimants. On the 27th of July, 2015, the
Claimants’ solicitors wrote letters of demand to the offices of the Defendants.
Therein, the defendants were given seven days within which to pay the
claimants’ benefit. The letters and the waybills of the courier company that
served same are hereby pleaded and same will be relied on at the hearing of
this case. The Claimants aver that apart from this letter, different overtures
were made to the defendants to ensure the payment of the severance gratuities
and furniture allowance, but the defendants reneged in agreements/promises made
to the Claimants.
24. The Claimants aver that prior to 27th of July, 2015, on the
13th of March, 2015 and 18th April, 2015 respectively, the Chairmen and
Councillors from Wukari and Karim Local Government Areas had already briefed
the office of Messrs Desmond S. Adebole & Co to demand for the payment of
their severance gratuities and furniture allowance. Letters to this effect were
served on the defendants, yet the defendants remained recalcitrant and adamant.
The letters with the waybills and receipts of the courier company through which
same was dispatched are hereby pleaded and same will be relied on at the
hearing of this case. The Claimants aver that the defendants treated their
letters of demand nonchalantly and disdainfully. The Claimants aver that since
the letters of demand were delivered to the defendants, the defendants refused,
failed/or neglected to heed to the demands for the payment of the severance
gratuities and furniture allowance.
25. The Claimants aver that the refusal, neglect and/or failure of
the Defendants to pay the severance gratuities have caused them severe
hardship, economic constraints and psychological trauma. Some of their wards
have dropped out of school. The claimants are struggling to cope with domestic
problems as a result of the non-payment of their benefits. The Claimants aver
that after the filing of this case, on the 11th of September, 2015, the
Defendants initiated process for settlement out of court. An agreement was
prepared to that effect. After the agreement was endorsed by the parties
concerned, the defendants requested to reschedule the terms of payment. The
agreement is hereby pleaded.
26. The Claimants aver that the 4th - 18th defendants were served
with pre-action notices before they were joined as co-defendants in this case.
The pre-action notices with the waybills of the courier company through which
same was dispatched are hereby pleaded and same will be relied on at the
hearing of this case. The Claimants' claims against the defendants jointly and
severally are as contained in the complaint earlier stated in this Judgment.
27. WITNESS STATEMENT ON OATH OF RIMAMTARI ALABURAH
The 1st Claimant- HON.
RIMAMTARI ALABURAH, Christian, Adult, Male, Nigerian, of Takum Local Government
of Nigeria. He testified as CW1 on
behalf of himself and all the Claimants in his witness statement on oath is
reproduced hereunder:
28. That I, am the 1st Claimant and the Chairman of the
Ex-Chairmen and Councilors forum of 16 Local Government Areas of Taraba State
who served between May, 2012- May, 2015 and August,2010- August, 2013, that is
the Claimants in this case and
by virtue of my position I am
conversant with the facts deposed to
herein:
a. That I have the consent and authority of the 2nd to 358th
claimants to depose to this affidavit.
b. That the claimants reside in various wards of the 16 Local
Government Areas of Taraba State.
c. That the 1st Defendant is the Chief Law Officer of Taraba
State with Taraba State with his office at the State Secretariat, Jaligo,
Taraba State. The 2nd Defendant's
office is Government House, Jalingo, Taraba State.
d. That the 3rd defendant is the Commissioner for Local
Government and Chieftaincy Affairs, Taraba State with his office at the Bureau
for Local Government and Chieftaincy Affairs Jalingo, Taraba State.
e. That I and other Claimants all severed in different
capacities as Vice - Chairmen, secretaries, leaders, deputy leaders, elected
Councilors, Supervisory councilors and special advices in fourteen (14) Local
Government Areas of Taraba State excluding Wukari and Karim Lamido Local
Government Areas from May, 2012 to May, 2015 and from August, 2010 to August,
2013.
f. That some of the claimants also served in different
capacities as Chairmen, Vice -Chairmen, Secretaries, Leaders, Deputy leaders,
elected Councilors, supervisory Councilors and special advisers in Wukari and
Karim Lamido Local Government Areas from August, 2010 to August, 2013.
g. That I as the 1st Claimant is the Chairman of the forum
served as the leader of Takum
Local Government Council. The 2nd and 3rd claimants served as Chairmen of Karim and
Wukari Local Government Councils, the 4th - 20th Claimants served as Vice – Chairmen in
the 16 Local Government areas of Taraba State, the 21st - 35th Claimants served as secretaries and the 36th - 50th
Claimants who were elected as Councilors, served as the leaders of their
various Local Government Councils.
h. That the 51st - 66th Claimants who were elected as
Councilors served as the Deputy Leaders of their various Local Government
Councils. The 67th - 199th Claimants served as legislative Councilors. The 67th
– 199th claimants severed as Legislative Councilors. The 200th -275th Claimants
served as supervisory Councilors, while the 276th - 358th Claimants served as
special advisers.
i. That the 1st - 199th claimants were all issued with
certificates of return by the Taraba State Independent Electoral Commission
(TSIEC) upon emerging victorious in the elections conducted by the commission.
The 200th – 358th claimants were all duly appointed as supervisory Councilors,
special advisers and secretaries in their local government areas and
appointment letters were issued to them accordingly. This enabled them to serve
in that capacity.
j. That upon the completion of our tenure in August, 2013 and
May, 2015 respectively, we are entitled to be paid severance gratuities and
furniture allowance of various
categories depending on the level/capacity each of us served.
k. That we were all duly elected and appointed. Thereafter, we
were sworn into office.
l. That we completed our tenure as Chairmen, Vice-Chairmen,
secretaries, leaders, deputy leaders, elected Councilors, supervisory
Councilors and special advisers successfully and meritoriously.
m. That by virtue of the provisions of the Political and Public
Office Holders of the Local Government of the States (Remuneration and other
Benefits) (Amendment No. 3) Law, 2008 we are entitled to severance gratuities
upon the completion of our tenure in August, 2013 and May, 2015 respectively.
The furniture allowance is supposed to be paid during our tenure.
n. That since the completion of our tenure, in spite of
repeated demands (oral and documentary) by the claimants to the offices of the
Executive Governor of Taraba State, the Speaker of the Taraba State House of
Assembly and the Chairman House Committee on Chieftaincy Affairs, the
respective offices failed, refused and/or neglected to accede to our demand.
o. That all entreaties made by prominent indigenes of Taraba
State on our behalf to persuade the defendants to pay the severance gratuities
and furniture allowance proved abortive.
p. That pursuant to the inaction of the offices afore-stated
above we formed a forum known as the "Ex-Chairmen and Councilors' Forum of
16 Local Government Areas of Taraba State who served between May, 2012 - May,
2015 and August, 2010 - August, 2013". The Claimants appointed me as the
chairman of the forum and other claimants as executive members. The forum was
saddled with the responsibility to use viable and legal means to recover the
claimants' benefits.
q. That the forum engaged the services of the law firm of
Messrs Desmond S. Adebole & Co to write letters of demand to the offices of
the defendants on behalf of the Claimants. On the 27th of July, 2015, the
Claimants' solicitors wrote letters of demand to the offices of the defendants.
Therein, the Defendants were given seven days within which to pay the
Claimants' benefits.
r. That apart from this letter, different overtures were made
to the Defendants to ensure the payment of the severance gratuities and
furniture allowance, but the Defendants reneged in agreements/promises made to
the Claimants.
s. That prior to 27th of July, 2015, on the 13th of March,
2015 and 18th April, 2015 respectively, the chairmen and Councilors from Wukari
and Karim Local Government Areas had already briefed the office of Messrs
Desmond S. Adebole & Co to demand for the payment of their severance
gratuities and furniture allowance. Letters to this effect were served on the
defendants, yet the Defendants remained recalcitrant and adamant.
t. That the defendants treated their letters of demand
nonchalantly and disdainfully.
u. That since the letters of demand were delivered to the
Defendants, the defendants refused, failed/or neglected to heed to the demands
for the payment of the severance gratuities and furniture allowance.
v. That the refusal, neglect and/or failure of the defendants
to pay the severance gratuities have caused claimants severe hardship, economic
constraints and psychological trauma. Some of the claimants' children have
dropped out of school. The claimants are struggling to cope with domestic
problems as a result of the non -payment of their benefits.
29. JOINT STATEMENT OF DEFENCE OF THE DEFENDANTS
The Defendants jointly filed
their statement of defence which is reproduced hereunder:
a. Save and except as is hereinafter expressly admitted, the
1st, 2nd and 3rd Defendants
deny each and every statement of fact or allegation contained in the Claimants
Statement of Facts Establishing the Cause of Action as if same was herein set out and denied
seriatim.
b. The Defendants admit paragraphs 1, 2 and 3 of the Claimants
Statement of Facts Establishing the
Cause of Action.
c. The Defendants deny paragraphs 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9,10
11,12,13,14,15,16, 17,18, 19, 20,21,22 and 23 of the Claimants Statement of
Facts Establishing the Cause of Action and put the Claimants to the strictest
proof thereof.
d. The Defendants aver that none of the Claimants was duly
elected or duly appointed to any of
the offices they claim.
e. The Defendants aver none of the Claimants is entitled to any
of the amount stated
on the Claimants Statement of Facts Establishing the Cause of Action.
f. The Defendants aver that it was resolved at the Joint
Accounts Council Meeting in 2005
that the responsibility for the payment of furniture allowances especially for all
ex-democratically elected local government officers be the responsibility of
the various local governments.
g. The Defendants shall raise an objection that the originating
processes of the Claimants is
incompetent; same not containing the seal of a legal practitioner recognized by the
Nigeria Bar Association (NBA) pursuant to
the Rules of professional conduct (RPC) for Legal practitioners.
h. AND the Defendants pray this Honourable Court to dismiss the
claim of the Claimants as being
baseless and unmeritorious; to discountenance with same and to refuse to grant any
of the reliefs sought by them as per
paragraph 24 of Claimants Statement of Facts Establishing the Cause
of Action.
30. STATEMENT ON OATH OF THE DEFENDANTS WITNESS
The Defendants witness by name
Mrs. Jemimah Nwunuji described as Director, Local Government and Chieftaincy
Affairs, Jalingo in her witness statement, she deposed as follows:-
I, Mrs. Jemimah G. Nwunuji
Female, Adult, Christian and Nigerian of bureau for Local Government and
Chieftaincy Affairs, Jalingo, Taraba State, do
hereby make oath and state as
follows:
a. That I am the Director, Local Government Affairs in the
Taraba State Bureau for Local
Government Affairs, Jalingo and hence familiar with the facts of this case.
b. That I have the consent and authority of my employer as well
as of all the Defendants to
depose to this affidavit
c. That the none of the Claimants served in any capacities
whatsoever as - Chairman,
Vice-Chairman, Secretary, leader, deputy leader, elected Councilor Supervisory
Councilor or special adviser in the fourteen Local Governments of Taraba State excluding Wukari and Karim
Lamido LGAS from May 2012 to
May 2015 and in Wukari and Karim Lamido LGAs from August 2010 to August
2013 or at all.
d. That none of the Claimants was issued with certificate of
return by the Taraba state independent electoral commission (TSIEC) upon
emerging victorious in any election
conducted by the TSIEC or at all.
e. That none of the Claimants was duly appointed or elected
into any of the offices
claimed.
f. That none of the Claimants had or completed any tenure.
g. That none of the Claimants is entitled to any furniture
allowance or severance gratuity as claimed.
h. That it was resolved at Joint Accounts Council Meeting in
2005 that the
responsibility for the payment of furniture allowances especially for
all ex-democratically
elected local government officers be the responsibility of the various local governments.
i. That none of the Claimants is entitled to any of the amount
they seek in their claim whether as
furniture allowance, severance gratuity or any entitlement whatsoever.
j. That none of the Claimants is entitled to any of the
reliefs sought before this court.
k. That I want this court to dismiss the claims of all the
Claimants as baseless.
l. That I make this oath in good faith believing same to be
true, correct and in accordance
with the Oath's Act.
m.
31. EVIDENCE BEFORE THE COURT AT THE TRIAL
The Claimants called the 1st
Claimant as their sole witness. The witness testified and tendered documents on
the 16th April, 2024 and he was cross examined on the 11th June, 2024. The
witness adopted his written statement on oath deposed to on the 15th February,
2018. In addition, the witness tendered letters of appointments, certificates
of return and oaths of office. The CW1 also tendered the terms of settlement as
Exhibit D. The same terms of settlement has earlier been attached Exhibit A to
the motion dated 10th February, 2016 and filed on 12th February, 2016 by the
defendants. The terms of settlement was not implemented.
32. CW1 gave evidence on the claims of the claimants. The position
occupied by each of the claimants and the amount each of them was entitled to
as furniture allowance and severance gratuity were specified in paragraph 12 of
the witness statement on oath. The
witness stated that despite several demands, the defendants refused to pay the
claimants the sum owed them as furniture allowance and severance gratuity.
33. Responding under cross examination, the CW1 responded as
follows:
“Yes, I am still the Chairman
of Ex-Councilors and Chairmen of Local Governments forum in Taraba State. It is
not a registered forum. I know the Claimants through their representative
Chairman or Leaders but I don’t know them personally. I have not received any
information that any of the Claimants has died. I can identify the certificate
of return before me is for Tyopine Nzuwe Philip from Chanchanji Ward Takum
Local Government elected as Councilor. The next one is for Danasabe Akwana,
from Akwana Ward Wukari Local Governments Certificate of return. We were
elected to serve in the Local Governments name against my name. Yes, we were
paid by the Local Government. Yes, up till the time we finished our tenure, the
Local Governments did not owe salaries or allowances. The State does not pay us
directly but they paid us through the Local and Yes, it means the State was not
owing salaries that is the evidence that we going to work. We were sworn in and
we took oath of office. Our oath of office is in evidence before this court.
This is our letter of appointment it is an Exhibit in this court. My
appointment letter did not provide my conditions of service. Acceptance letters
will not be with us the Claimants. It will be with the various Local
Governments. We have our payment vouchers as evidence that we were working. I
do not have the payment vouchers in this court.
The State Government is the one
that controls the Local Government funds through joint account so that is why
we sue the State Government.
34. At the end of the cross examination of the CW1, the Claimants
closed their case. Thereafter, the Defendants through their Counsel Mr. C.D.
Abongaby informed the court that he was not calling any witness. That he was
resting his case on that of the Claimants. The Defendants did not therefore,
call any witness to testify in their defence.
35. CLAIMANTS FINAL WRITTEN ADDRESS
The Claimants formulated a sole
issue for determination, thus:
Whether the Claimants on the
balance of probability have proved their claims and are entitled to the reliefs
sought.
36. The Claimants argued that on their part, they a called a sole
witness in person of the 1st Claimant and tendered letters of appointments,
certificates of return, oaths of office and terms of settlement. That the
defendants on their side, notwithstanding filing a statement of defence and
witness statement on oath of one Mrs. Jemimah G. Nwunuji deposed to on the 12th
February, 2016, did not call any witness.
That the defence of the
defendants devoid of embellishment is contained in paragraphs 3, 4 and 5 of the
joint statement of defence.
The paragraphs stated thus:
“3. The Defendants aver that
none of the Claimants was duly elected
or duly appointed to any of the offices they claim.
4. The Defendants aver none of
the Claimants is entitled to any of
the amount stated on the Claimants Statement of facts Establishing the cause of
action.
5. The Defendants aver that it
was resolved at the Joint Accounts Council meeting in 2005 that the
responsibility for the payment of furniture allowances especially for all
ex-democratically elected local government officers be the responsibility of
various local governments.”
37. That the defendants did not call any
witness. That It is trite that where a defendant fails to call witness, his
statement of defence is deemed abandoned. That in the case of FIRST BANK V.
MOMOH (2020) LPELR-51517(CA) (PP. 28-29 paras. D), the Court of Appeal held:
"The Respondent denied the
Appellant's claims and failed to present any evidence in support of his defence
or rebut the counterclaim of the Appellant. In civil proceedings, the burden of
proof does not rest on one party, but keeps shifting among the parties, See
Sections 131 - 134 of the Evidence 2011and UNION BANK V. RAVIH ABDUL & CO.
LTD (2018) LPELR- 46333.
It was the duty of the Respondent, in discharging the
evidential burden of proof on him, to present evidence to support his
averments. In EKWEOZOR & ORS V. REG. TRUSTEES OF THE SAVIOUR'S APOSTOLIC
CHURCH OF NIG. (2020) LPELR-49568 (SC), the Apex Court per PETER-ODILI, J.S.C.
stated thus;
"...it needs reiteration
that the burden of proof in civil cases has two distinct facets; the first is
the burden of proof as a matter of law and the pleadings normally termed as the
legal burden or the burden of establishing a case; the second is the burden of
proof in the sense of adducing evidence usually described as the evidential burden,
While the legal burden of proof is always static and never shifting, the other
type being evidential burden of proof shifts or oscillates constantly as the
scale of evidence preponderates... "(Emphasis Supplied). The failure of
the Respondent to give evidence to support the statement of defence at the
trial Court is an abandonment of the defence. In MILITARY GOV. OF LAGOS STATE
ORS V. ADEYIGA & ORS (2012) LPELR-7836 (SC), the Apex Court stated that;
...In the absence of evidence
to support the statement of defence, the pleadings of the defendants/appellants
were abandoned the defence is deemed abandoned for all time.”
38. The Claimants submitted further that what is required of the
Claimants in this case is minimal proof. Referring the court to the authorities
of Oguma Associated Companies (Nig) Ltd V. IBWA Ltd (1988) 1 NWLR (Pt. 73) 658
@ 682; (1988) 3 SCNJ. 13 and Balogun V. U.B.A. Ltd (1992) 6 NWLR (Pt.247) 336 @
354; (1992) 7 SCNJ. 61
That the Taraba State Political
and Public Office Holders of the Local Governments of the State (Remuneration
and Other Benefits) Law, 2000 (as amended) by Amendment No. 4 of 2009 provides for
benefits of political and public office holders in Taraba State including but
not limited to furniture allowances and severance gratuity. That the sum
claimed by the Claimants in this suit is intadem with the sum provided in this
law as furniture allowance and severance allowance for holders of offices of
Chairman, Vice-Chairmen, Secretaries, supervisory Councilors, special advisers,
leaders of legislative house, deputy leaders of Legislative house and member of
legislative houses.
39. The Claimants submitted further that in the discharge of the
burden on them, the claimants called PW1 and tendered letters of appointment,
certificates of return at election, oaths of office and terms of settlement
duly signed by the parties to this suit.
40. The claimants submitted that they having served in political
and public offices are entitled to furniture allowance and severance benefits
as provided for in the Political and Public Office Holders of the Local
Governments of the State (Remuneration and Other Benefits) (Amendment No. 4)
Law, 2009 of Taraba State.
41. Also, that Exhibit D tendered by PW1 is the same as Exhibit A
attached by the Defendants to their Motion on Notice for extension of time
dated 10th February, 2016 and filed on 12th February, 2016. That the court is
entitled to look into any document in its record and make use of it in order to
arrive at a just decision. That the Supreme Court has in a number of decided
cases held that a Court of law is entitled to look into its record and make use
of any document it considers relevant in determining issues before it.
Reference was made to, Sharing Cross E.S. Ltd v. U.A. Ent. Ltd (2020) 10 NWLR
(Pt. 1733) 561 at 588, paras. D-F, Abiodun v. FRN (2018) LPELR-43838(SC) (Pp.
12-13 paras. F), Fumodoh v. Aboro (1991) 9 NWLR (Pt.214) 2010 at 229; Agbareh
& Anor v. Mimra & 2 Ors (2008) 2 NWLR (Pt.1011) 378 at 411 - 412;
Badejo v. Minister of Education (1996) 9 -10 SCNJ 51."
42. The Claimants submitted that they have discharged the burden
on them on the balance of probability.
43. The Claimants further submitted that by Paragraph 5 of the
joint statement of defence, the claimants having tendered evidence showing that
they were elected or appointed as the case may be, the defendants are under a
duty to tender the resolution of the Joint Account Council meeting of 2005 by
which the responsibility of paying the claims of the claimants was shifted from
the defendants to the various local government councils of Taraba State. That
the defendants did not only woefully fail to tender the resolution but
abandoned their defence.
44. Further submitted that the preponderance of evidence or
balance of probability has been defined means that the evidence of the party on
whom lies the onus of proof is more likely to be true than that of the adverse
party. See Odofin v. Mogaji (1978) 4 SC p. 91: Omorhirhi v. Enatevwere (1988) 1
NWLR (Pt. 73) p. 746.
45. To the Claimants it simply means one side's position outweighs
the other when all admissible evidence before the Court is placed on an
imaginary scale. That in the circumstances of this case where the defendants
failed to call evidence, the scale tilts only in favour of the Claimants.
46. The Claimants, finally submitted that they are entitled to the
reliefs sought by them. That it is trite law that where a Claimant leads
credible evidence in proof of his case and the Defendant fails to lead any
credible evidence to tilt the scale to his side, judgment will be for the
Claimant. See Dabo Vs Abdullahi (2005) 7 NWLR (Pt. 923) 181.
47. The Claimants urged the court to grant the reliefs sought by
them for the following reasons:
i. The Claimants proved their
case by calling PW1 and tendering letters of appointment, certificates of
return, oaths of office and terms of settlement.
ii. The Defendants who claimed
that it was resolved at a meeting of Joint Account Council in 2005 that payment
of allowances be the responsibility of local government councils neither called
evidence nor tendered document in prove of averment.
iii. The Defendants did not
call any witness thereby abandoned their defence.
iv. Standard of prove required
of the claimant is on the balance of probability or preponderance of evidence.
48. DEFENDANTS JOINT FINAL ADDRESS
The defendants filed their
joint final written addresses wherein they raised two issues for determination
thus:
Whether the Claimants have
established any claim before the court and/or
Whether the Claimants have
proved the claim if any, to be entitled to an award.
49. The Defendants submitted that the Claimants have not proved
any of the heads of claim by any
credible or lawful evidence, nor have they discharged the burden of proving by
strict proof, the special claim of gratuities and furniture allowances amounting
in the cumulative sum of N1,157,894,754.60 and the improvable general damages
of N2,000,000000 each for the 358 Claimants, from August 2013 and May, 2015
amounting to about N716,000,000:00.
50. That the Claimants by their paragraph 9 of the further amended
statement of facts establishing the
cause of action, stated thus;
“The Claimants aver that upon
the completion of their tenure in August 2013 and May, 2015, respectively, they
are entitled to be paid severance gratuities and furniture allowance of various
categories depending on the level/capacity each of them served”
51. That in Paragraph 10 the claimants stated/listed the table of
scales of their said entitlements of severance gratuities and furniture
allowances, arising, according to them, from
Taraba State Political and Public Office Holders of the Local
Governments of the State ( Remuneration and other Benefits (Amendment No 3)Law
2008 and not The Political and Public Office Holders of the Local Government of
the State (Remuneration and other Benefits)(Amendment No 4)Law 2009,which
should be the right law that covered the
period they claimed to have served, that is August 2010 to August 2013 and May
2012 to May, 2015.
52. That there are 358 Claimants and there ought to be 358 proofs
of salary slips to match each claimant, the same with letters of appointments
specifying the amount of salaries attached with each position. That the
Certificate of Return showed the election of the person named therein without
specifying the salary earned. Also, that the Secretaries' and Special Advisers'
appointments should specify their salary scales; these are not stated or proved
before the court.
53. The Defendants reiterated, the position of the court in labour
matters as expressed in Suraju Rufai v Bureau of Public Enterprises & Ors
(supra), delivered on 4t June, 2018.
54. That "In labour relations, the burden is on the claimant
who claims monetary sums to prove not only the entitlement to the sums, but how
he/she came by the quantum of the sums, and proof of entitlement is often by
reference to an instrument or document
that grants it, See Mr. Mohammed Dungus & Ors v ENL Consortium Ltd
(2015) 60 NLLR (Pt 208) 39), not the oral testimony of the Claimant, except if
corroborated by some other credible evidence"
55. The defendants referred to also 7UP Bottling Company Plc v
Augustus (2012) LPELR20873 (CA), NNPC V Clifco Nigeria Ltd (2011) LPRLR2022
(SC).
56. That most importantly is the legal and unconstitutionality of
the status of the applicable laws herein, if any. The defendants submitted that the Principal Law, The Taraba State
Political and Public Office Holders of Local Government Law No 6 2000 and the
subsequent amendments, The Taraba State Political and Public Office Holders of
the Local Governments of the State ( Remuneration and other Benefits (Amendment
No 3) Law 2008 and The Political and Public Office Holders of the Local
Government of the State (Remuneration and other Benefits)(Amendment No 4)Law
2009 were all made in pursuance of Section 84 and 124 of the Constitution as
the powers vested on the National Assembly and State Houses of Assembly, as the
case may be, subject to prior determination by the Revenue Mobilization,
Allocation an Fiscal Commission.
That the Supreme Court has held
that, in a similar case as this case from Anambra State and Adamawa State,
RMAFC has not determined these scales of salaries and benefits, the Claimants
gave or the Houses of Assemblies apportioned to them. Hon Aboki, JSC, held in the case of Nwokedi v Anambra State
Govt & Anor (2022) LPELR-57033(SC)
PP 16 -23, held thus "it follows therefore that the Act, makes no mention of a Councilor as one of
those Public Office Holders to benefit from payment of salary and emolument
from the consolidated Revenue Fund and
whose salary shall be fixed by the Revenue Mobilization Allocation and Fiscal
Commission.......To the Defendants the
import of Section 32(d), Item N, Part I of the Third Schedule of the
1999 Constitution, as amended,(which in my view is an Nigeria, 1999, (as
amended), as well as, Section 6(1)(d) and(f) of the RMAFC Act is that the
inclusion of Local Government Councilors by Anambra State Law No7salaries shall
be fixed by the Revenue Mobilization Allocation and Fiscal Commission and
charged upon the Consolidated Revenue Fund of Anambra State, is at variance
with the express provision of the 1999 Constitution, as amended. In the instant
case, the names of the Claimants have not been captured under Section 124 (4)
of the Constitution and Section 32(d), Item N, Part I of the Third Schedule to
the Constitution, the Claimants cannot therefore claim any benefit purported to
have been conferred on them under the said law. I so hold".
57. To the Defendants, Councilors are also not legislators, so
called, as Section 318 of the Constitution, defines Legislative house to mean,
the Senate, The House of Representatives or a House of Assembly of a State.
58. That the court would not accept a piece of evidence which is
not material and of no
probative value merely because the only evidence before the court is
that of the claimant. It is not in every case that the claimant is entitled to
judgment because the evidence in support of the claimant case is uncontradicted
or the defendant abandons his case, See Arewa Textile Plc v Finetex Lt (2003) 7
NWLR (Pt 619) 322at341 Para D-G. Furthermore, that the court must be satisfied
that such uncontradicted evidence is credible and sufficient to sustain the
claim. See Gonzee (Nig)Ltd v Nigerian Educational Research and Development
Council (2005) 13 NWLR (pt943)634 at 650 Para D, Onu, JSC.
59. That the lack of the salary scales in the letters of
appointment or proof by the last pay slip and the invalidity of the instrument
by which their claim inures, makes whatever evidence given in the case which was
uncontradicted, incredible and unreliable and
the court in the absence of contrary evidence, cannot rely on those
evidence.
60. That in Bello v Sanda (2012)1 NWLR (pt 1281)219, where the
duty cast on as in this case, their entitlements, from his pleading and
evidence, the defendant will be free not to enter a defense in a case and such
does not amount to admission.
61. The Defendant’s submitted that the Claimants have failed to
prove the claim by the documents and instruments that entitles them, as there
is no link between the claim, their letters of employment and/or certificates
of return and the instrument creating or providing the benefit. A fortiori,
that the instrument providing the benefit and entitlements is unconstitutional
and should, like in the cases referred to herein. The Defendants finally
submitted that the court should declare the said Law(s) Taraba State Political
and Public Office Holders of the Local Governments of the State (Remuneration
and other Benefits (Amendment No 3) Law 2008 and the Political and Public
Office Holders of the Local Government of the State (Remuneration and
other Benefits) (Amendment No 4) Law
2009 null and void and also to dismiss the claims.
62. COURT’S DECISION
The case of the claimants who
are 358 in number is that they served in different capacities as Chairmen, Vice
– Chairmen, Secretaries, Leaders, Deputy Leaders, Elected Councilors,
Supervisory Councilors and Special Advisers in Fourteen Local Government Areas
of Taraba State excluding Wukari and Karim Lamido Local Government Areas from
May 2012 to May 2015 and from August 2010 to August 2013. Some of the claimants
also served in different capacities as Chairmen, Vice –Chairmen, Secretaries,
leaders, deputy leaders, elected councilors, supervisory councilors and special
advisers in Wukari and Karim Lamido Local Government Areas from August2010 to
August 2013.
63. The Claimants aver that by virtue of the provisions of the
Taraba State Political and Public Office Holders of the Local Government of the
states (Remuneration and other Benefits) (Amendment No. 4) Law, 2009, the
claimants were entitled to be paid furniture allowance during their tenure in
office. While severance gratuities and furniture allowance of various
categories depending on their different positions they held or served, was to
be paid to them upon completion of their tenure but same were not paid to them.
64. The names of the Three Hundred and Fifty Eight (358)
Claimants, the posts/positions they each held, the various Local Governments
they each served and the amount each of the Claimants is entitled to as
severance gratuities and furniture allowance have been tabulated by the
Claimants and is contained in this Judgment. It is also in evidence that the
defendants initiated a process of settlement out of court. The terms of
settlement was signed by the parties but same was not honoured by the
defendants. Trial in the case therefore continued on the merits.
65. In their joint statement of defence the 1st, 2nd and 3rd
Defendants made a general traverse without specifically addressing the various
claims of the Claimants. They generally denied each and every statement of
facts establishing the cause of action as if same was herein set out and denied
seriatim. The Defendants denied all the paragraph of the Claimants statement of
facts and put the claimants to the strictest proof thereof. The defendants aver
that none of the Claimants was duly elected or duly appointed to any of the
offices they claim and so they are not entitled to any of the amounts stated in
their statement of facts. But in another breath the Defendants avered that it
was resolved at the Joint Accounts Council meeting in 2005 that the
responsibility for the payment of furniture allowances especially for all
ex-democratically elected Local Government officers be the responsibility of
the various Local Governments.
66. The witness statement on oath of the Defendants’ proposed
witness was not adopted nor tendered on behalf of the defendants because the
defendants rested their case on that of the claimants and so did not call any
witness to adopt or tender its statement of defence. The said witness statement
of the defendants is deemed abandoned.
67. The Defendants at the trial elected not to defend its case by
not calling oral evidence but proceeded to file a final address. The defendants
counsel informed the court that he was resting his case on that of the
claimants. The effect of a pary’s failure to defend a claim against him/it/her
is that the said party or parties are presumed to have admitted the case made
out against it/him/her by the other party and the trial count has little or no
choice than to accept the unchallenged and un – controverted case placed before
it by the claimants. See Ifeta v Shell Petroleum Development Corporation of
Nigeria Ltd (2006) Vol.6 MJSC 123, Consolidated Res Ltd v Abofor Ventures
Nigeria Ltd (2007) 6, NWLR (Pt. 1030) 221, Okolie v Marinho (2006) 15, NWLR
(pt. 1002) 316.
68. This however does not mean automatic victory for the claimants
because the law is that a party must succeed on the strength of his or her case
and not rely on the facts that there is no defence before the court. The
absence of a defence does not exonerate that the claimants in this case of the
evidential burden of proof placed on them in Section 13 (1) & (2) Evidence
Act 2011, see also Ogunyale v Oshunkeye (2007) 15, NWLR (pt. 1057) 218. The claimants
in this case must adduce credible evidence worthy of belief. Evidence does not
in all cases become credible merely because it is unchallenged. See Akalonu v
Omokuro (2003) 8, NWLR (Pt. 821) 190, Chabasaya v Anwasi (2010) LPELR – 839
(SC).
69. The issue that arise for determination in this case in my view
is :-
70. Whether the Claimants on the pleadings and evidence are
entitled to the relief sought. The Law is settled that in the determination of
rights to or entitlement claims, it is the Claimants that has the burden to
place before the court their rights and entitlements as well as any instrument
of appointment or law which provides for their entitlement claims, or their
rights and obligations. See Okoebor v Police Council (2003) 12, NWLR (pt. 834)
444 Okomu Oil Palm Co. v Iserhienrhien (2001) 6, NWLR (Pt. 710) 660 at 673,
Idoniboye – Obi v NNPC. Fakuade v O.A.U.T.H. (1993) 5, NWLR (pt.291) and
section 131 (1) and (2) of the evidence Act 2011.
71. In this case the 1st Claimant had testified for himself and on
behalf of all the Claimants. He tendered and adopted his witness statement on
oath and he was duly cross examined by the Defendants counsel. The Claimants
witness also tendered in evidence letters or appointments of all the claimants
including his own. He also tendered all the certificates of return issued to
them after their election by the Taraba State Independent Electoral Commission.
Also tendered by the Claimants witness are oaths of office and terms of
settlement. All these were duly admitted by the court as exhibits and
accordingly marked as such without any objection by the Defendants’ Counsel.
72. The Defendants defence in totality is contained in Paragraph
3,4 and 5 of the joint statement of defence. Devoid of any embellishment it is
quoted here under as follows:
“3” The defendants aver that
none of the Claimants was duly elected or duly appointed to any of the offices
they claim.”
“4” The defendants aver that
none of the Claimants is entitled to any of the amount stated on the Claimants statement
of facts establishing the cause of action.”
“5” The Defendants aver that it
was resolved at the joint account council meeting in 2005 that the
responsibility for the payment of furniture allowances especially for all
ex-democratically elected local government officers be the responsibility of
various local governments.”
73. In my view what the defendants have done as quoted above is
insufficient traverse. I think it is prudent to understand what a sufficient
traverse is. Plethora of cases have helped in answering this question.
74. In the case of Holloway & Ors v Jimoh & Ors (2017)
LPELR-506920 (AC) the Court of Appeal Per Ikyegh Joseph Shagbaor JCA (of
blessed memory) held that:
“For a traverse to be
sufficient it must be frank and answer the argument directly and fully. Vide
Lewis and Peat (N.R.I) Ltd v Akhimien (1976) 7 S.C 157, Meridien Trade
Corporation Ltd v Metal Construction (W.A.) Ltd, (1998) 4 NWLR (Pt.544)
1.pp.38-39 paras C-E.
75. Also, in ZAAGUBO v PAREPARE (2021) LPELR-56421 (CA) where the
Court Per Moore Adumein JCA, (now JSC) held that:
“The law is that a traverse, by
a defendant must not be general but should be specific. A denial must clearly
allude to the fact pleaded and should not be ambiguous or evasive. See A.G
Anambra state V C. N. Onuselogu Enterprises Ltd (1987) 4 NWLR (PT. 66), 547. PP
14-15 paras F-A.
76. In NIPOST V Musa (2013) LPELR – 20780 CA It was held that the
rules of pleadings do not allow a defendant to be hedgy or evasive in his
answers to the facts averred by the plaintiff. Once the defendant refuses to
meet the facts directly either by admitting or by denying them except of course
he is not in a position to so do, he is taken to have admitted them. Also,
insufficient traverse and the effect of on the defence was also tackled by
Mohammed Lawan Garba, JCA, now JSC IN Essien & Anor. v. Effanga & Ors (2012) LPELR- 8495 (CA)
thus:
“The law is settled that until
averments in a plaintiffs’ pleadings are effectively traversed in their
essential materials by the pleadings in a Defendants statement of defence, no
issue would be joined by the parties that would call for proof. Proof
presupposes disputed facts contained in the parties pleading which require to
be established by evidence in order to ground a claim made by a party.
Consequently, where material facts in averments of a party are not specifically
and effectively traversed or challenged by the other party, by the rules
of pleadings, no issue would have been
joined by the parties on such facts and so the need for proof would not arise.
A cardinal principle in the rules of pleadings is that in order to raise an
issue of fact that would require proof there must be a proper traverse in the
defendant’s pleadings. A Defendant who does not admit an averment of fact in plaintiff’s
pleadings must expressly state and set out facts which support a general denial
in order to effectively traverse such pleadings and thereby join issues of fact
that would make proof necessary. He does not satisfactorily do so by a general
or insufficient denial and saying that he will at the trial put the plaintiff
to the strictest proof thereof.”
77. Similarly, in the case of YEKINI v. SUNMONU (1987) 2 NWLR 587
at 592 the Supreme Court has held that a denial in a statement of defence that
the defendants deny paragraph -------or XYZ of the statement of claims and put
the plaintiffs to the strictest proof thereof amounts to insufficient denial or
insufficient traverse to put the matter thus denied in issue.
78. Also, the Apex court had emphasized that a halfhearted or weak
denial of specific facts contained in pleadings of a party would be regarded as
insufficient and ineffective traverse of such facts capable of joining issue
that calls for proof. See Adimora v Ajufo (1988) 3 NWLR (80) 1, NIG GENERAL
INSURANCE v EMOH (1990) 3 NWLR (138) 314, Osafile v Obi (1994) 2 SCNJ 1. PP1012
(Paragraphs F–F).
79. And in the case of VAN VILET TRUCKS (NIG) LTD v. AMCON &
Anor. (2018) LPELR – 46789 (CA) the Court of Appeal Per Obaseki – Adejumo JCA
held thus:
“Furthermore, it is trite that the principles of
pleadings is that before an issue of fact can be said to have been joined by
the parties in their pleadings, there must be proper and specific traverse of
the facts contained in pleadings. See Agbor v. Agom (2013) LPELR – 2112. In Ogu
v Mandid Technology & Multi – purpose Cooperative (2010) LPELR – 4690 CA
Per Garba, JCA (as he then was) at page 38 – 41, paragraphs. A – F on the
question whether every material facts in a statement of claims must be specifically
traversed, held as follows:
“Well, it is a known cardinal principle of pleadings that
before an issue of fact can be said to have been joined by the parties in their
pleadings, there must be proper and specific traverse of the facts contained in
the pleadings or statement of facts was made by a party in his pleadings, there
must be proper and specific traverse of the facts contained in the pleadings.
Where a positive and specific allegation of statement of fact was made by a
party in his pleadings, there must be express such allegation of statement of
facts for an issue to be properly joined by the parties on such facts. So if a
defendant wishes to joint issues with a plaintiff on any statement of facts in
the statement of claims, he must state specifically the facts of the denial in
the statement of defence otherwise there would be no proper traverse which
gives rise to an issue joined in the pleadings.
80. On the authority of the above cited decisions, it is settled
law that the implication of an insufficient or general traverse on the
defendants as and in this case is that it is deemed as an admission to the
averments in the claimants’ statement of facts as pleaded. Consequently, I am
of the considered view that the defendants in this case have not joined issues
and have consequently provided no defence and evidence in defence of the case
against them.
81. Additionally, at the close of the case of the claimants, the
defendants rested their case on that of the claimant. The defendants did not call
any witness. It is trite that where a defendant failed to call witnesses, his
or her statement of defence is deemed abandoned in First Bank V Momoh (2020)
LPELR – 5151 (AC) PP 28-29 Paragraphs D, the Court of Appeal held as follows:
“The Respondent denied the
Appellants claims and failed to present any evidence in support of his defence
or rebut the counter claim of the Appellant. In civil proceedings the burden of
proof does not rest on one party, but keeps shifting among the parties. See
section 131 – 134 of the Evidence Act 2011 and Union Bank V RAVIH ABDUL &
CO LIMITED (2018) LPELR - 46333. It was the duty of the Respondent, in
discharging the evidential burden of proof on him, to present evidence to
support his averments. In EKWEOZOR ORS V Reg. Trustees of the Saviors’
Apostolic Church of Nigeria ( 2020) LPELR – 49568 (SC), the Apex Court Per
PETER- ODILI, JSC stated this:
“ it needs reiteration that the burden of proof in Civil
Cases has two distinct facts, The first is the burden of proof as a matter
of law and the pleadings normally termed
as the legal burden of the burden of establishing a case. The second burden is
the burden of proof in the sense of adducing evidence usually described as the
evidential burden. While the legal burden of proof is always static and never
shifting, the other type been evidential burden of proof shifts or oscillates
as the scale of evidence preponderates. The failure of the respondent to give
evidence to support the statement of defence at the trial Court is an abandonment
of the defence. In Military Gov. of Lagos State & Ors V Adeyiga & Ors
(2012) LPELR – 7836 (SC), the Apex Court stated that; in the absence of
evidence to support the statement of defence, the pleadings of the
Defendants/Applicants were abandoned. The defence is deemed abandoned for all
time.”
82. Furthermore, position of the law where a Defendant as in this
case rests his case on that of the Claimant or Plaintiff and the implication of
such on the Defendants’ case has long been settled by judicial authorities. The
law is trite that when a Defendant rests his/her case solely on the Plaintiffs
evidence, several implications arise. By not presenting a defence or evidence
to contradict the Plaintiffs’ case, the Defendant may be deemed to have admitted
the truth of the Plaintiffs assertions. In civil cases, the burden of proof
typically lies with the Plaintiffs or Claimants to establish their case on the
balance of probabilities. However, if the Defendants as in this case does not
challenge the Claimants evidence, the burden cannot effectively shift, leading
the Court to conclude that the Claimants has met their burden simply because
the Defendants failed to contest it. The lack of effective opposition from the
Defendant can result in an automatic acceptance of the Claimants claims if the
evidence adduced by the Claimants is persuasive.
83. In other words, the Defendants’ decision not to present
evidence did not shift the burden of proof from the claimants. The effect of
this is that where the plaintiff fails to discharge their burden of proof the
court may dismiss the case without requiring the Defendant to lead evidence.
The fundamental principle in civil litigation is that the burden of proof lies
with the Plaintiff. If the Defendant rests their case on that of the plaintiff
evidence without presenting any counter evidence, they effectively rely on the
Plaintiff’s inability to proof their case. If the Defendant does not lead any
evidence, the implication is that the Plaintiffs/Claimants evidence stands unchallenged.
84. When a Defendant rests their case solely on the
Plaintiffs/Claimants evidence, the defendant may be deemed to have accepted the
Plaintiffs/Claimant’s assertion if they do not specifically challenge them.
This is especially pertinent if the Plaintiff’s case is credible and
consistent. By not presenting any evidence, the Defendant runs the risk of
losing the case if the court finds the Plaintiff's evidence sufficient to
establish their claims on the balance of probabilities. It needs to be
emphasized that a Defendant resting their case on the plaintiff's evidence, the
plaintiff's evidence risks losing if the Plaintiffs meets their burden of
proof. A Defendant must clearly challenge the Plaintiff's assertions to avoid
implied admissions and strengthen their defense. If the defendant does not
present evidence, they may face unfavorable judgment based solely on the
Plaintiff's case.
85. A party is free to choose whether to adduce evidence in
support of his pleadings or not and the court has no power to interfere with
the exercise of that right. The decision of a Counsel not to call evidence is
neither a mistake nor mere inadvertence, but in actual fact a district exercise
of the legal right which a party is free to exercise and which the court has no
power to interfere with. When a party makes a choice which the law requires him
to make and that choice was acted upon by both parties in the suit and by the
court the party who made the choice cannot turn around afterwards and claim
that he had made a mistake. Such a mistake of law will not excuse the party.
86. The legal implication of a Defendant resting his case on the
Claimant case has been stated repeatedly by the courts in a plethora of
authorities. In Fair line Pharmaceutical Industries Limited and Anor. v. Trust
Adjusters Nigeria Limited (2012) LPELR-20860 (CA) Tsamani, JCA (now JSC) held
and follows:
“It is the law that where a
defendant does not adduce evidence, as in the instant case, the evidence before
the court goes one way, leaving the court with no other evidence or set of
facts with which to do the measuring of the scale. This is because in a
situation where a defendant leads no evidence in proof of the fact pleaded by
him, such pleading is deemed abandoned and the defendant will be left with
nothing with which to present against the plaintiff. Thus, in a situation where
a defendant abandoned his pleadings and rest his case on the plaintiff
evidence, he is deemed in law to have completely accepted both the pleadings
and evidence or the case presented by the plaintiff. In such a situation, it
may mean that: (a) the defendant is stating that the plaintiff has not made out
any case for the defendant to controvert or respond to, or (b) He admits the
facts of the case as presented by the Plaintiff, or (C) He has a complete legal
defence in law in answer to the Plaintiffs case. It seems therefore that a
Defendant may adopt the option of resting his case on that of the Plaintiff as
a legal strategy. If that strategy succeeds, then his case is enhanced, and he
may therefore succeed on that ground, but if he fails, that strategy would have
been decimated. See Osadim V Tawo (2010) 6 NWLR (Pt. 1189) 155 and Oduwale V.
West (2010) 10 NWLR (Pt. 1203) P598 at 621. The standard of proof expected of
the Plaintiff in such a situation is a minimal one, and in such a situation,
there is nothing to put on the other side of the imaginary scale against the
evidence preferred by the Plaintiff. “See also, Thomas Ofomaja V. Hon.
Commissioner for Education & Ors (1994) LPELR- 14121 (CA), Akanbi V. Alao
(1989) 3 NWLR (Pt. 108) 118. The Administrators / Executors of the Estate of
Gen. Sani Abacha V. Samuel David Eke – Spiff & Ors, (2009) LPELR 3152 (SC)
(2009) 2 – 3 SC (Pt. 1139) 97, (2009) 7 NWLR 97 SC. Similarly, in Emmanuel
Okonkwo V. Kano Agricultural Supply Co. Limited & Anor. (2012) LPELR – 9466
(CA) the Court of Appeal held as follows:-
“The law is well settled that where one of the parties
calls no evidence on an issue before the Court, the evidence called by his
adversary ought normally to be accepted as the truth unless it is of such a
nature and quality that no reasonable tribunal will accept it. In other words,
the onus of proof in a case or an issue in which one of the parties calls no
evidence at all is discharged on a minimal of proof. See also Duru V. Nwosu
(1989) 4 NWLR (pt. 75) P. 238.”
87. From the above authorities, it is clear that a decision by a
Defendant to rest his case on that of the Claimant has far reaching
consequences and a Defendant should not take such a decision as a matter of
taking chances. Once counsel makes that announcement and addresses the court on
it, he is bound and must stand or swim by that decision. This was better stated
by Omoleye JCA in Emmanuel Okonkwo V. Kano Agricultural Supply Co. Limited
& Anor. (Suppra) thus:
“Where a Defendant rest his case on that of the Plaintiff
at the trial, the Defendant has taken the enormous risk of blowing a muted
trumpet. The trial court has little or no choice but to accept the unchallenged
and uncontroverted evidence placed before it by the Plaintiff since it was not
discharged by the Defendant during cross examination”.
88. The position stated above is basically correct except that it
does not mean that the Claimant is automatically entitled to judgment. The
Claimants are still under a legal duty to prove their case by credible and
acceptable evidence. In the instance case the Claimants must still prove their
entitlements to the reliefs claimed by the evidence and by law or instrument
that gives them the entitlements. The Claimants must satisfy the minimum
evidential rule. See PDP V. INEC & ORS (2012) LPELR – 8406 (CA),
Martchem Industries (Nig) Ltd V.M.F.
Kent (W.A.) Ltd (2005) ALL FWLR (pt. 271) 1, Balogun v. U.B.A. Ltd (1992) 6
NWLR (pt. 247) 336, Nwabueoku v. Ottih (1961) 2 SCNLR 232, Nzeribe v. Dave Eng.
Co. Ltd (1994) 8 NWLR (pt. 361) 124.
89. The Claimant's Counsel submitted that what is required of the
Claimant in this case is minimal proof and cited the authorities of Oguma
Associated Companies (Nig) Ltd v. IBWA Ltd (1988) 1 NWLR (pt. 73) 658-682, as
well as Balogun v. U.B.A. Ltd (1992) 6 NWLR (pt. 247) 336 at 354. Also, that
the Taraba State Political and Public Office Holders (Remuneration and Other
Benefits) Law, 2000 as amended by Amendment No. 4 of 2009 provides for the
benefits of political and public office holders in Taraba State and its Local
Government Councils. And that this included but not limited to furniture
allowances and severance gratuity. That the sum claimed by the Claimants in
this suit is in tandem with the sum provided in this law as furniture allowance
and severance allowance for holders of offices such as Chairman, Vice Chairman,
Secretaries, Supervisory Council members, special advisers, leaders of
Legislative houses, deputy leaders of legislative houses, and members of
legislative houses at the Local Government level of Taraba State.
90. The Defendants Counsel as we have seen and held in this case
rested his case on that of the Claimants and did not call any witness. The
authorities and legal principles I have enunciated in this judgment is to the
effect that the Defendants are in law deemed to have abandoned their defence as
they did not lead a witness to adopt it in this case. Nevertheless, in the
interest of fair hearing I will analise the issues raised by the Defendants in
their final written address. This I will now do.
91. The Defendants had argued that there are several unreported
decisions of Courts of Co-ordinate jurisdiction, and even the Supreme Court to
the effect that a Councilor is not one of the Public offices mentioned under
section 6 (1) and section 32 of the Revenue Mobilization Allocation and Fiscal
Commission Act and section 124 (4) of the Constitution of the Federation
Republic of Nigeria. The Defendants submitted that based on the decision in
Nwokedi v. Anambra State Government & Anor. (2022) LPELR – 57033 (SC) which
held that a Councilor is not one of the Post named under section 318 of the
1999 Constitution and so do not come within the purview of political office
holders in Section 32 (d) item N. part 1 of the third schedule of the 1999
Constitution as amended. To start with the above decision of the Supreme Court
is distinguishable from the case at hand. This is because the Claimants in this
case are not claiming their entitlements of completion of tenure under the
third schedule of the 1999 constitution as amended. Rather these are political
office holders whose remuneration is created by the law made by the Taraba
State House of Assembly that has the power to legislate on Local Government
affairs within a State and in this case Taraba State.
92. Section 163 of the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic
of Nigeria (as amended) grants the Taraba State House of Assembly authority to
legislate on Local Government matters. Section 163(1) provides that the House
of Assembly of a State may make provisions for the establishment, structure,
composition, and powers of local government councils. Also, Section 7 of the
same Constitution establishes the system of Local Government in Nigeria and
States in subsection 1.
93. That the system of Local Government by democratically elected
Local Government Councils is guaranteed by the Constitution. This section
collectively indicates that while Local Governments are Constitutionally
recognized, their structure, powers, and funding are largely determined by
state legislation or the legislative powers of the State House of Assembly.
This has created a framework in which the State House of Assembly can legislate
over Local Government affairs.
94. It is on the authority of the above Constitutional provisions
that the Taraba State House of Assembly acting under its powers to do so did
pass the Political and Public Office Holders of the Local Governments of the
State (Remuneration and Other Benefits) (Amendment No. 4) Law 2009 to provide
for the remuneration including but not limited to furniture allowance and
severance gratuity. The sum claimed by the Claimants in this suit is in tandem
with the sum provided in this law as Furniture Allowance and Severance
Allowance for holders of offices such as Chairman, Vice-Chairman, Secretaries,
Supervisory Councilors, special advisers, leaders of legislative houses, and
members of legislative houses. The claim of the claimants in this suit is not
based on any other law but the one made by the Taraba State House of Assembly,
pursuant to the powers derived under Section 7(1) and Section 163(1) of the
1999 Constitution. The said law as amended made by the Taraba state House of
Assembly has not been held by any court of law to be unconstitutional. The said
law is therefore valid. The said law has provided for the general structure and
administration of local government councils in Taraba State since the year
2000. It has only undergone amendments from time to time till date.
95. The Defendants in their final written address also argued that
the 358 Claimants in the case ought to have attached proof of their salary
slips each specifying the amount of salary each of them earned. It is to be
noted that the claim of the Claimants in this suit is not a claim for unpaid
salaries as the Defendants would want the court to believe. The argument
therefore by the defendants that there is no proof of what is the actual scale
of entitlements is also misconceived. This is because the schedule to the
political and public office holders of the Local Government of the State
(Remuneration and Other Benefits) (Amendment No. 4) Law 2009, specifically made
provisions for the actual amounts to be paid as furniture allowance and
severance gratuity for the Chairman of Local Government, Vice Chairman of Local
Government, Supervisory Councilors, Special Advisers, Secretary to the Local
Government, Leader of the Legislative Council of Local Government, Deputy
Leader of the Legislative Council of Local Government, and Elected Councilors.
There is therefore, no burden placed by law on the claimants to prove the
provisions of a law validly made by the Taraba State House of Assembly. By the
provision of Section 122(2) of the Evidence Act, 2011, courts are to take
judicial notice of all laws and enactments made and having the force of law,
and courts must give effect to them.
96. Also, it is my considered view therefore that the schedule to
the Political and Public Office Holders of the Local Government of the State
(Remuneration and Other Benefits) (Amendment No. 4) Law 2009 of Taraba State
mentioned the particular amounts payable as furniture allowance and severance
gratuity to the claimants. Therefore, calculating the said benefits on the
basis of amounts received by the Claimants in their last pay slips does not
apply in this case. The cases relied upon by the defendants in their submission
are therefore not helpful to them.
97. The Defendants also submitted that this court should declare
the Political and Public Office Holders of Local Government of the State
(Remuneration and Other Benefits) (Amendment No. 4) Law 2009 of Taraba State as
null and void. On this point, I am of the firm view that the Defendants cannot
approbate and reprobate at the same time. This is because the Defendants passed
the law in question and presented the said law as the benefits of the Claimants
for their services. The Claimants, having rendered services believing on the
strength and basis of the said law. It therefore does not lie in the mouth of
the Defendants to turn around and argue that the law it made should be declared
null and void. It therefore does not lie in their mouth to a probate and
reprobate in this regard. Such an argument is misconceived to say the least as
such argument coming from the Defendants in this wise is unfortunate. This court
will not nullify a law validly enacted by a State House of Assembly, pursuant
to the powers conferred on it by the 1999 Constitution of the Federal Republic
of Nigeria, as amended. By the provision of Section 169 of the Evidence Act
2011, the Defendants are estopped by their conduct from arguing that the said
law they made be declared null and void. I therefore discountenance this
argument.
98. Having discussed and analyzed the submission of the
Defendants, what is crucial to the determination of this case is whether the
claimants have discharged the burden on them. That is to say whether the
claimants have proved their case to be entitled to the reliefs sought by them.
In the discharge of the burden on them, the Claimants called CW1 who testified
on their behalf and tendered letters of appointments, certificates of return of
their election issued to them by the Taraba state independent electoral
commission, oaths of office and place reliance on the Taraba State Political
and Public Office Holders of the Local Government of the State (Remuneration
and other Benefit) Law, 2000 as amended by Amendment No. 4 of 2009 which
provide for their benefits. The defendants counsel also cross examined the
Claimants’ witness. I have gone through all the exhibits submitted by the
Claimants and having carefully analyzed same. I am of the firm view that the
Claimants did serve their various Local Governments as stated in their claims
before this court. I therefore find and hold that the claimants have proved
their entitlements of office. Having found in favour of Claimants, I declare
that they are entitled to furniture allowance and other severance benefits as
provided for in the political and Public office Holders of the Local
Governments of the state (Remuneration and other Benefits) (Amendment No. 4)
Law 2009 0f Taraba State I so hold.
99. I had stated earlier that the defendants led no evidence but
elected to rest their case on that of the claimants. It is trite law that where
a Claimant lead credible evidence as in this case in proof of his case and the
defendants fails to lead any credible evidence to tilt the scale to his side,
judgment will be for the Claimant. See Dabo v Abdullahi (2005) 7 NWLR (pt. 923)
81. I therefore grant the reliefs sought by the Claimants.
100. The Claimants have asked for general damages of (?2,000,000) Two
Million Naira for each of them. The word general damages refers to
non-precuniary losses or injuries that are not quantifiable or calculated with
precision. They are awarded to compensate the Claimants for harm, injury, or
loss that is not easily measurable. General dameges are those that the law
presumes to flow from the wrongful act
of a Defendant. It is not specifically quantified but is meant to compansate
for losses that are direct result of the injury. See Owolabe v. Kaduna Native
Authority (1963) 1 ALLNLR 182, Shell BP v Jammal (1974) 1 ALLNLR (pt. 1) 150,
Olaniyan v University of Ilorin (2001) B NWLR (pt.730) 129, Mobil Producing
Nigeria Unlimited v. Okorotie, FBN Plc v. Ojo (2018) 16 NWLR (pt. 1646) 241.
Generally, the principle guiding award of damages for breach of contract is
restitute in intergrum, meaning that the aggrieved party will only be awarded such damages as
may fairly and reasonably be considered
as either arising naturally or within the contemplation of both parties at the
time they made the contract as a probable result of the breach. see Kusfa v
United Bawo Construction Co. Ltd (1999)LPELR 1721(Sc). Thus, the measure of
damages in breach of contract is what
actually the aggrieved party will be entitled to assuming the contract was
performed or the breach term was performed.
101. Where as in this case it is a breach of contract of employment
or the refusal to pay the entitlements or end of tenure gratuity as the case in
point, the principle of award of general damages in contract is applicable.
That is that the aggrieved party in the contract of employment will only be
awarded what will be his due and unpaid benefits and entitlements and salary in
liue of notice where such is stipulated by the said contract of employment. See
Chukwamah v Shell Petroluem (1993) 4NWLR (pt. 289) 512 at 536.
102. The purpose of general damages is to provide and compensate for
emotional distress, pain and suffering, mental anguish, reputation damage.
Above all, it is aimed to compensate and not double copensation. Factors to be
considered in the award of general damages by the court among others are
severity of injury or loss, impact on daily life, age, health and life
expectancy, emotional and psychological effects among others. In all it is at
the discrition of the court. In the case at hand the court has granted the reliefs claimed by
the Claimants which are monetary in
nature. I am therefore, unable to grant the claimants the reliefs of general
damages i so find and hold.
103. Before I draw a curtain on this judgment, I find it compelling
to say whether the Claimants are entitled to costs. Black Law Dictionary 6th
Edition describes costs in a judicial proceeding to mean “pecuniary allowance
made to a successful party and recoverable from a losing party, for his
expenses in prosecuting or defending an action as the case may be. The
principle of law is that costs follow events and a successful party to
litigation is entitled to be awarded costs except where he misconducts himself.
The party who is on the right is to be indemnified for the expenses to which he
has been unnecessarily put in the proceedings, as well as to compensate for his
time and effort in prosecuting the matter in court. The court is to take into
cognizace all the circumstances of the case. The grant or refusal to award
costs is discretionary and is not based on the pleadings of the parties or any
strict proof. See Mekwunye V. Emirates Airlines (2019) LPELR 46553(SC).
104. From the records before me, this suit was instituted way back in
2015 in the Jos Judicial Division of the Court. The Claimant all live in Taraba
State. From Jos this matter moved to Abuja and Yola in 2018 to commence the
denovo, and from Yola, the matter moved again to Gombe and back to Yola again.
This matter has lasted more than nine years since it commenced, and during
which time the Claimants have had to travel from Jalingo, Taraba State, on
several occasions with the huge costs spend on themselves and their Counsel all
through these nine years. From the records, the Claimants have engaged several
Counsel including a Senior Advocate of Nigeria, all in a bid to see to the
conclusion of this trial. There is no doubt that costs have been incurred by
the Claimants, of which this court, being a court of justice and equity, cannot
afford to look away.
105. The Latin Maxim “ubi jus ibi remedium" which means, where
there is a wrong, there is a remedy underscores the necessity for the award of
costs by the court. Section 36, (1) of the National Industrial Court Act
empowers The President of the Court to make rules in respect of costs. Also,
Section 40 of the National Industrial Court of Nigeria Act 2006 empowers this
court to award costs. Section 40 provides.
“Subject to the Provisions of
this Act or any other enactment, rules of court or law, the costs of and
incidental to all proceedings in this Court shall be in the discretion of the
Court, and the Court shall have full power to determine by whom and to what
extent the costs are to be paid.”
106. Also, Order 55 of the National Industrial Court Civil Procedure
Rules 2017 provide as follows:
(1) In every suit, the cost of the whole suit, and of each
particular proceeding therein, and the cost of every proceeding in the court,
shall be at the discretion of the court as regards the person by whom they are
paid.
(2) The court may order the successful party, notwithstanding the
party’s success in the suit, to pay the cost of any particular proceeding
therein.
(3) The court may order costs to be paid out of any fund or
property to which a suit or proceeding relates.
(4) Where cost is ordered to be paid, the amount of such cost
shall, if practicable, be summarily determined by the court at the time of
delivering the judgment or at the time of making the order.
(5) In fixing the amount of cost, the principle to be observed is
that the successful party is to be indemnified for the expense to which the
party has been unnecessarily put in the proceedings.
107. Costs do not have to be prayed or asked for by the successful
party before the court could grant them. It can be granted suo motu by the
court, see the case law authorities where Nigerian courts awarded cost without
being asked for the party. The Supreme Court in Ojukwu v. Odife (1988) 1 NWLR
(PT. 71) 337, SPDC v. NNPC (2018) 15 NWLR (PT. 1643) 361, and Okoro v. UACN
(2016) 12 NWLR (PT. 1525) 571. See also the Court of Appeal cases of NIPCO PLC
v. Mobile Producing Nigeria Unlimited (2018) 14 NWLR (PT. 1638) 217, Access
Bank PLC v. Akinbola (2018) 16 NWLR (PT. 1646) 241, and GTB v. Olangunju (2015)
9 NWLR (PT. 1463) 211 among others where costs was awarded by the court without
application to that effect but at the discretion of the court.
108. I need to reiterate here again that, costs do not have to be
prayed for or asked for by a successful party before the court can grant same.
It can be granted suo motu as shown in the above cited authorities of the
Supreme Court and Court of Appeal. The court has the discretion to assess the
quantum of the cost to be awarded to a
successful party in a case taking into consideration, among other relevant
factors the cost of filing the case, fee for service of Counsel and Counsel
expenses in the course of prosecuting the case, duration of the proceedings,
genuine and reasonable out of pocket expenses incurred in the prosecution of
the case, purchasing power or value of Nigerian currency at the time of filing
the case and at the time the judgment was delivered. See Oyebanji & Ors v.
Shodara (2020) LPELR-50093 (CA).
109. Therefore, considering the factors stated above, especially the
length of time the case has lasted as well as the circumstances of this case as
well as the value of Naira now, and on the authority of Section 40 of the
National Industrial Court Act 2006 and Order 55, Rule (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) of
the National Industrial Court Civil Procedure Rules 2017. I award ?100,000 (One
Hundred Thousand Naira) as costs to each of the Claimants in this case.
110. Without avoidance of doubt, I hold and declare as follows:
1. The claimants have proved their case and therefore they are
entitled to judgment in their favour.
2. Consequently, Reliefs A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, J are
hereby granted.
3. Relief K, which is for Two Million Naira ?2,000,000.00 being
general damages for each of the claimants is hereby refused.
4. The claimants are to be paid by the defendants jointly and
severally the sum of ?1,245,065,455.00 (One Billion, Two Hundred and Forty-Five
Million, Sixty-Five Thousand, Four Hundred and Fifty-Five Naira only.)
5. I award cost of ?100,000.00 Naira (One Hundred Thousand
Naira only) to each of the claimants.
6. The said judgment sum and cost shall be paid not later than
30 days from the date of this judgment.
Judgment is entered
accordingly.
Hon. Justice J.T. Agbadu
Fishim, Ph.D.
Presiding Judge.