Media
- Home
- Details
His Lordship, Hon. Justice B. B. Kanyip of the National Industrial Court of Nigeria, Lagos Judicial Division on Tuesday 16th May in a judgment delivered dismissed claimant claims in a case of Mr Gabriel Aghuno (Claimant) Vs. John Holt Plc (Defendant) for lack of prove.
The claimant is a retiree of the defendant, rose to become Senior Executive, the position he was retired as vide a letter of 16th October 2009. That contrary to the undertaking of the defendant vide the letter of 16th October 2009, it was in February 2010 that the defendant paid N307,591.00 as six months salary and allowances in lieu of notice; with another N1,556,185.15 paid on 25th April 2010 though what it stood for was not indicated to the claimant. That the claimant protested the haphazard payment of his severance and gratuity package, despite which the defendant still failed to pay the outstanding sum of N5,842,457.77 that had been due to him since 16th October 2009 when he was asked to proceed on retirement, hence the instant suit.
On 5th July 2013, the claimant took up a complaint against the defendant and sought among others; Payment by the defendant to the claimant the sum of N5,842,457.77 being balance of his severance and gratuity package (after deduction of the part payment of N1,863,776,15.00 and the value of assets) with the sum claimed due and payable from 16 October 2009 when the defendant advised the claimant to proceed on immediate retirement.
To the defendant, the claimant was retired as a Senior Executive in October 2009; and the claimant’s full and final entitlements and gratuity (including the claimant’s six months’ salary in lieu of notice), the claimant’s indebtedness to the defendant were computed in accordance with the Company Policy. The claimant was then paid in two cheques amounting to N1,863,776.15. That under cross-examination, the claimant admitted that the defendant had paid the claimant’s salaries and emoluments up to 16th October 2009, which is the date of the claimant’s retirement from the defendant.
The defendant submitted a sole issue for determination, namely: in view of the pleadings and evidence adduced at the hearing of this suit has the claimant not failed to prove his claims? To the defendant, the claimant has failed to prove his claim. The defendant proceeded that the claimant’s claim for interest of 30% per annum on the alleged or purported sum of N5,842,457.77 from 16th October 2009 to the date of judgment cannot be supported. That the claimant has not led any evidence in support of his claim of interest on a purported sum that is not even available to him.
On the defendant’s argument that given the state of the pleadings of the claimant, the claimant did not prove his case, the claimant submitted that the defendant should not be taken serious as the submission lacks substance and merits.
After reviewing the argument of the parties, affidavits filed by the respective counsels, written submissions as well as their oral adumbration and the authorities cited by counsels, the Court Presided by Hon. Justice B. B. Kanyip expressed thus;
“It is for the claimant to prove that he is entitled to the reliefs he claims, not for the defendant to disprove the claims. The duty to disprove the claims only arises if the claimant proves his claims.
This Court in Dungus proceeded to hold that because the claimants made no attempt whatsoever to indicate to the Court the exact provisions of the documents they frontloaded that grant them the entitlements they claim, merely frontloading a document and saying that a right inures from it without indicating the clause, section, article or paragraph that grants the right is not sufficient; and that counsel should not expect that it is the Court that will shop for the relevant article that substantiates the claim of his/her client.
From the state of the claimant’s pleadings and the evidence before the Court, the claimant did not prove his entitlement to N5,842,457.77 as balance of his severance and gratuity package, or how he even came by the quantum of the said sum.
On the whole, I totally agree with the defendant’s description of the claimant’s final written address that it is “lamentably a skewed regurgitation of the pleadings plus a garbled and specious reconstruction of the evidence placed before the Court, with sophistry and invective”. No other description could have been more apt.
The claimant’s case accordingly fails and is hereby dismissed. Cost of this suit is put at Three Hundred Thousand Naira (N300,000.00) only payable by the claimant to the defendant within 30 days of this judgment, failing which it shall attract interest at the rate of 10% per annum until fully paid.
