Industrial Court Declares Termination of Employment Unlawful, Orders Ecobank to Pay Claimant’s 3-Months Basic Salary

• 1933 Thursday 7th June 2018

Industrial Court Declares Termination of Employment Unlawful, Orders Ecobank to Pay Claimant’s 3-Months Basic Salary

 

Enugu---His Lordship, Hon. Justice I. G. Nweneka of the National Industrial Court of Nigeria, Enugu Judicial Division on Thursday 7th June 2018 in a Judgment declared that the resignation of D’MAX AMRERU AKPOVONA (claimant)  from the services of the Ecobank  Plc  (Defendant) was induced, influenced and forced by the Defendant and therefore amounted to unlawful termination of his employment, ordered Ecobank  Plc to pay D’MAX AMRERU AKPOVONA three months’ basic salary representing one month’s basic salary in lieu of notice and two months’ basic salary wrongfully debited to his account and to a refund of the sum of N1, 739, 708.64 being deductions made on his salaries for shares that were never issued to him.

 

The Claimant commenced this action by a Complaint dated 16th October 2015. By amended statement of facts dated 6th December 2016, the Claimant claimed against the Defendant among others for: A declaration that the Claimant’s resignation from the services of the Defendant was induced, influenced and forced by the Defendant and therefore amounted to unlawful termination of employment and An order of Court mandating the Defendant to remit all the Claimant’s pension entitlements with interest to his pension managers and also release his pay slip to be able to have access to his pension fund.

 

The Claimant was a staff of the Defendant and rose through the ranks to become Head of Operation Enugu Main Branch of the Defendant in August 2008. In January 2010, the sum of N2, 850,000 was withdrawn from Savings Account no. 011000101664 of one Samuel Obamawu which was domiciled in Lagos State from the Enugu Main Branch. The withdrawal was authorized by the Claimant. Mr. Samuel Obamawu denied making the transaction resulting in a query and subsequent advice to the Claimant to resign.

 

Consequently, by letter dated 21st April 2010 the Claimant resigned his appointment. The letter was rejected and the Claimant was asked to back-date it to 16th April 2010 which he did. It is the Claimant’s case that in spite of his forced resignation the Defendant refused to release his exit documents with which to process his entitlements hence this action.

 

The Defendant’s case is that the Claimant approved payment of N2, 850,000 out of Savings Account no. 011000101664 to an impostor resulting in loss of fund to the erstwhile Bank. It is the Defendant’s case that the Claimant exhibited unparalleled indiscretion and negligence in approving the payment and as a result the Claimant and his two subordinates were queried and interviewed by the disciplinary committee.

 

Due to his dismal performance at the disciplinary committee he was advised to resign in order not to mar his future banking career. The Defendant states that Claimant’s letter of resignation dated 21st April 2010 was returned for correction and compliance with the erstwhile Bank’s policy and his subsequent letter of 16th April 2010 was accepted by the Bank.

 

The Defendant contends that the exit documents were dispatched to him immediately after his resignation was accepted, his entitlement computed and netted off against his debts leaving a debit  balance of N3, 062, 410.81 which grew to N3, 289, 556.30 in October 2014.

 

 

The claimant argued that the reason stated in paragraphs 3, 4 and 5 of the Defendant’s amended statement of defence that the Claimant exhibited unparalleled indiscretion and negligence in the discharge of his duty has not been proved and the report of the Disciplinary Committee was not tendered.

 

Furthermore, It was contended that the Claimant is not indebted to the Defendant because the Defendant did not place any concrete evidence of his indebtedness.

 

After reviewing the argument, processes filed and the submissions of learned Counsel for the parties, the Court Presided by Hon. Justice I. G. Nweneka expressed thus;

The evidence in proof of this claim is contained in paragraphs 22, 23 and 24 of Claimant’s further statement on oath dated 16th January 2016 and exhibits Q, R, S and T. Exhibit R is very instructive. It shows, contrary to the Defendant’s denial in paragraph 15 of the amended statement of defence, that there was a prior communication between Mr. Wole Ogunremi and the Claimant. His email of 22nd April 2010, exhibit R, is explicit. It reads: “This resignation date is not acceptable. You are to send in your letter effective the date of your notification.” [underlining mine] The date of notification is 16th April 2010, exhibit S. Indubitably, the Defendant compelled the Claimant to resign his employment immediately. He was not given a choice.

 

In this case, not only did the Defendant not pay the Claimant the one month’s basic salary in lieu of notice, it debited his account with two months’ basic salary in lieu of notice. This, to my mind, is oppressive and the worst form of unfair labour practice which must be deprecated. In one breath the Defendant demanded the Claimant’s immediate resignation, in another breath it debited him with two months’ salary in lieu of notice. Sadly, learned Counsel for the Defendant tried to justify this illegality.

 

In the circumstance, I find and hold that the Claimant’s resignation from the services of the Defendant was induced, influenced and forced by the Defendant and therefore amounted to unlawful termination of his employment. Relief one succeeds and is hereby granted.

1. In the final analysis, the claim succeeds in part. For the avoidance of doubt, judgment is entered in favour of the Claimant against the Defendant as follows:

 

1. Reliefs 3, 5 and 8 fail and are hereby dismissed. Reliefs 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 9 and 10 succeed in part.

 

1. It is hereby declared that the Claimant’s resignation from the services of the Defendant was induced, influenced and forced by the Defendant and therefore amounted to unlawful termination of his employment.

 

1. It is hereby declared that the Claimant is entitled to payment of his severance packages, gratuity and one month’s basic salary in lieu of notice.

 

1. It is hereby declared that the Defendant’s continued refusal to remit the Claimant’s pension contributions for the period of January 2002 to May 2003 to his pension account with Stanbic IBTC Pension Manager is unlawful and contrary to the Defendant’s conditions of service.

 

1. An order is hereby made mandating the Defendant to remit the Claimant’s pension contributions for the period January 2002 to May 2003 to his pension managers and release his pay slips to enable him access his pensions.

 

708. The Claimant is entitled to payment of three months’ basic salary representing one month’s basic salary in lieu of notice and two months’ basic salary wrongfully debited to his account and to a refund of the sum of N1, 739, 708.64 being deductions made on his salaries for shares that were never issued to him.

 

1. N500, 000 general damages is awarded in favour of the Claimant against the Defendant.

 

1. Costs of N100, 000 is awarded against the Defendant in favour of the Claimant payable within 7 days from the date of this judgment.

 

1. The above monetary sums shall bear interest at the rate of 10% per annum from 14th June 2018 until the judgment debt is fully satisfied.

 

 

For Full Judgment, Click Here

Share Via WhatsApp