Media
- Home
- Details
Portharcourt---His Lordship, Hon. Justice P. I. Hamman of the National Industrial Court of Nigeria, PortHarourt Judicial Division on Wednesday 20th June 2018 in a Judgment dismissed case of the Claimant MR. FRIDAY NGBADIKE brought against GULF MANNING SERVICES (NIGERIA) LIMITED as unmeritorious.
With the coming into effect of the 3rd Alteration Act, the matter was transferred to this court vide Order of the Federal High Court made on 7th of October, 2013.
Parties refiled their processes before this court. The Claimant filed a Complaint 15th September, 2015, claiming the sum of $381.00 (Three Hundred and Eighty One US Dollars) monthly from November, 2009 till the employment of the Plaintiff is lawfully terminated and The sum of $89,100 (Eighty Nine Thousand, One Hundred US Dollars) being compensation arising from disability of against the Defendant:
It is the case of the Claimant that, he was employed by the Defendant in March, 2006, and placed on board a vessel known as LNG Port Harcourt. The Claimant alleges that, while on board LNG Port Harcourt enroute Portugal, he sustained injury while carrying an iron door manually and the iron door hit him on his thigh on the 3rd of December, 2008, and he requested for medicare but the officers on board allegedly refused him medical care. That the iron door ought to have been carried by crane and not by hand. That the accident was reported on board and when nothing was done, the Claimant also reported the accident to his Crew Appraisal Rating on 3rd February, 2009.
That upon his return to Nigeria, rather than treating his injury, the Defendant again put him on board the vessel which worsened his condition as a result of which he was taken to a Hospital in Barcelona, Spain for medical attention. And when he returned to Nigeria from Spain, he was off signed on board and went home to bury his mother after informing the management of the Defendant of the injury in writing on 7th February, 2009.
That the Defendant subsequently sent the Claimant to their retained hospital in Warri, Delta State (Capitol Hill Clinic/Hospital) in March, 2009 where he was treated till 24th of July, 2009 when the hospital declared him unfit to carry out his duties on health grounds.
That despite his diligent attendance at the physiotherapy, there was no improvement on his health and he started experiencing sexual dysfunction and the Defendant again asked him to go to Lagos for treatment which he did between 16th and 17th of November, 2009.
The Claimant stated further that, while undergoing treatment in Lagos, he discovered that his salary was stopped by the Defendant since 13th day of November, 2009.
That neither the Defendant nor the authorities of Lagoon Hospital inform him of any report dated 2nd December, 2009, and the said report was allegedly made in anticipation of the present suit. That he was never at any time told to resume work or go for further medical checkup even when the report of the accident was acknowledged in an email sent by one Mr. Thomas David.
To the Defendant, the Claimant abandoned his job and has refused to report to duty till date, and that all crew members of the vessel including the Claimant were properly catered for during voyages. That the Claimant was sent to a hospital in Spain as rightly admitted by the Claimant and he continued to be taken care of by being treated here in Nigeria, including treatments onboard the vessel for illnesses until when he suddenly refused to either visit the clinic for medical checkup or report for work to enable the Defendant certify his medical fitness to continue with his work.
That the Claimant was not dismissed by the Defendant as being alleged; rather, he refused to report to work till date; and has refused to take advantage of all opportunities offered to him to be treated and properly taken care of which would have mitigated the situation, but he rather chose to make frivolous claims against the Defendant.
According to the Defendant, the Claimant is not entitled to any of the claims and the court should therefore dismiss the suit with substantial cost.
After reviewing the argument, processes filed and oral submissions of learned Counsel for the parties, the Court Presided by Hon. Justice P. I. Hamman expressed thus;
It is therefore clear that the Claimant, who stated that he stopped going to work from November, 2009 has not shown that he presented himself to the Defendant and the Defendant refused to give him work. He decided to stay away from his place of work and is now urging the court to compel the Defendant to pay him for periods he never worked.
Granting this claim will amount to encouraging lassitude or indolence at the work place which no court should do. In any case, the claim is neither supported by law, equity or even public policy. I therefore have no hesitation in refusing this claim as same has not been established or proved by the Claimant. Relief 1 is therefore refused and same is hereby dismissed.
On the second relief/claim, having looked at the conducts of both the Claimant and the Defendant in this suit, I do not think the Claimant has in anyway helped his case going by his conduct leading to the institution of this suit.
The Claimant was again examined at the said hospital on 22nd July, 2009 which led to the issuance of the medical report dated 24th July, 2009 (exhibit CW5) upon which the Claimant is placing heavy reliance on in proof of his claim that he was declared unfit to continue with his duties on medical grounds.
I am of the humble view that the Claimant unfortunately frustrated the performance of his contract of employment by himself. If he did not intend to continue working with the Defendant what stopped him from resigning his appointment with the Defendant and then claim his entitlements. He did not do that. He rather refused to either resume work or present himself for further medical examination. Was he expecting the Defendant to continue to persuade and plead with him till eternity?
I am therefore not satisfied that the Claimant has established this leg of his claim before the court to be entitled to judgment in the sum of $89, 100 for compensation arising from disability, and the second relief/claim is hereby dismissed.
In the final result, I hold that the Claimant’s case is unmeritorious. It accordingly fails, and same is hereby dismissed.
For Full Judgement, Click Here
