Back

The court has exclusive jurisdiction in civil causes and matters relating to or connected with any labour, employment, trade unions, industrial relations and matters arising from workplace, the conditions of service, including health, safety, welfare of labour, employee, worker and matter incidental thereto or connected therewith.

LIVE Proceeding VIRTUAL COURT

News


Just In: Industrial Court Orders Suit to Proceed To Hearing, Strikes Out 2nd Defendant as Party to Suit


1034 Wednesday 14th March 2018

 

His Lordship   Hon. Justice Ibrahim S. Galadima of Owerri Judicial Division of the National Industrial Court of Nigeria today Wednesday 14th Of March, 2018 orders Suit BUCKY U. AGARRY     v. LONESTAR DRILLING NIG. LIMITED & Anor to proceed to hearing and struck out second defendant as party to the suit.

 

This ruling is in respect of an objection filed by the 2nd Defendant/Applicant ERNEST ASAK against the main suit. It seeks for grant of Orders to strike out the name of the 2nd Defendant/Applicant, ERNEST ASAK from the suit and to declare the suit incompetent by reason of the fact that it is accordingly statute barred.

 

The preliminary objection was filed on the 13/2/15 with the following as the grounds that he Applicant is not the 1st Defendant’s employee as alleged by the Claimant, the Applicant’s appointment with the 1st Defendant having been terminated by the 1st Defendant since 23rd April, 2007. That the actions allegedly taken by the 2nd Defendant were taken at the instance of the 1st Defendant who was at the material time, the employer/principal of the Claimant and the Applicant. That The Claimant’s suit instants was filed on the 4th of December, 2013, whilst the purported cause of action accrued on the 19th of May, 2006, spanning a period of over seven (7) years, and thus in breach of the Rivers State Limitation Law, Cap 80. 1999.

 

The presiding Judge, Hon. Justice I.S. Galadima after reviewing the arguments and submissions of parties stated thus;

 

Having gone through the entire processes and authorities cited in this application, I therefore completely agree with the Applicant on this issue. Besides, I do not find how the Claimant’s right is prejudiced if the 2nd Defendant’s name is removed from this suit. He remains at best, a witness in the proceedings. It is therefore my informed and reasonable believe that this action can be maintained against the 1st Defendant alone without the necessity of joining the 2nd Defendant.

 

I hereby grant the 1st prayer and order that the name of the 2nd Defendant/Applicant, ERNEST ASAK, be struck out.

 

Furthermore, on whether this suit is time - barred, I actually find that the matter was first filed before the Rivers State High Court of Justice in Port Harcourt in 2006 and remitted to this court after the passage of the 2010 Third Alteration Act which granted this court exclusive jurisdiction over employment cases. This suit was transferred to this court by virtue of Order 37 Rules 1 (2) (a) and (b) of the Rivers State High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules 2010 as well as Section 45 of the Rivers State High Court Law.

 

Equally, by the combined effects of Section 24 (3) of the National Industrial Court Act 2006 and Order 62 Rule 3 sub rule 1 of the National Industrial Court Rules 2017, where a matter is transferred from any Federal, FCT, or State High Court to the National Industrial Court, this court shall treat the cause or matter as if it had been originally filed here in accordance with the rules of this court.

 

In conclusion, the application succeeds in part. For the avoidance of any doubts, I only grant an order to strike out the name of the 2nd Defendant in this suit as same is a misjoinder. I however refuse to grant the second prayer to declare this suit as statute barred. The matter shall proceed to full hearing accordingly.

I award no costs.

For full ruling, click here…