Media
- Home
- Details
Owerri --His Lordship, Hon. Justice Ibrahim S. Galadima of the National Industrial Court of Nigeria, Sitting in Owerri on Tuesday 30th October 2018 in a judgment validated the summary dismissal of the PIUSITY MARY ADAORA (Claimant) from the service of UNITY BANK OF NIGERIA (defendant). The Court also held that the accusation of her withdrawing the sum of N33,653,000.00 by means of fraud through three different account holders is unproven and unfounded, Ordered defendant to pay the sum of N 2,898,552.79 being her gratuity and 5% on the interest as at January 2016; full housing and transportation allowances and other benefits due to her from April 21 2016 up to November 15 2016 within 30 Days.
This Claimant’s suit was filed on the 2nd of December 2016 against the defendant among others; A declaration that the purported summary dismissal of the Claimant from the employment of the Defendant by letter of 15/11/2016 is unlawful, wrongful, null and void. A declaration that the Claimant did not withdraw the sum of N 33,653, 000.00 or any amount at all from the accounts of Pastor Boniface Anyike, Ezinwo Chinemenum, and Nyonwa Order as alleged by the Defendant in its correspondences including that of 15/11/2016.
Likewise, the sum of N 6,222,147.00 being the outstanding salaries, allowances, 13th Month, two months’ salaries in lieu of notice and the 2015 gratuity of the Claimant fixed by the Defendant.
The Claimant was employed by the Defendant Bank in September 2007. Her employment was purportedly terminated when she was summarily dismissed by the Defendant on the allegation of conducting herself in an “irregular and unethical” manner amounting to fraud. She had prior to her summary dismissal been on administrative suspension with effect from April 21, 2016. Her offense allegedly was that she facilitated particularly three bank customers (who were purportedly ghost employees) into withdrawing monies from their bank accounts and thereby conniving to defraud the Rivers State Senior Secondary School Board.
The Claimant’s case is that she was wrongfully and unlawfully summarily dismissed upon false allegations. She further alleged that she has been robbed of all outstanding allowances and salaries. The Defendant’s defense is that the Claimant was rightly and lawfully summarily dismissed based on substantial proof of irregular and unethical practices by her. She is accordingly not entitled to the reliefs she now seeks.
The Defendant Counsel’s final written address is dated 26th of July stated that the Claimant was duly informed by means of a query letter, her misconduct leading to her suspension from performing her duties as recommended by an investigative panel that sat in Port Harcourt. That she was given ample opportunity to present her case and thereafter the committee recommended her dismissal and communicated her via letter dated 15th November 2016.
Furthermore, Claimant’s Counsel expressed that the Defendant has to prove the allegation of criminal impropriety allegedly committed by the Claimant since in law, the burden to prove a crime lies with the party who alleges such.
That besides, the School board had written a letter which clearly stated that those three account holders were no longer staff of their schools. It, however, did not make any allegations against the Claimants particularly and or wrote to state that certain amounts of monies were found stolen.
Furthermore, that the letter of summary dismissal which stated that she withdrew cash and assisted customers to make a total of 13 separate withdrawals in contravention of the bank’s standard of operations for third-party withdrawals, is unfounded and that the reasons given for the dismissal of this Claimant were unfair, particularly in view of the fact that the offense alleged is unsubstantiated.
On the action of the disciplinary committee set up by the Defendant, learned Counsel wants this Court to find that that committee was biased and had not based its findings on the legal requirement of prove beyond reasonable doubt before recommending the summary dismissal of the Claimant.
He said the Claimant had demanded for her unpaid salaries via several correspondences which fell on deaf ears. That even when the Claimant was under suspension she was denied the half salary which ought to have been paid in accordance with the terms of her employment and the provisions of the employee’s handbook. That it should be held that the Claimant is entitled to be paid all her full salaries from April to November 2016 when she was wrongfully dismissed.
After reviewing the argument of both parties, the Court Presided by Hon. Justice Ibrahim S. Galadima expressed thus;
“Notably, there is an admission by the Claimant of her involvement in the conduct complained of by the Defendant. This can be gleaned from her Exhibit C13 which is a copy of an email she sent to the Defendant.
“I perused the Standard Operations Manual of the Defendant-bank, especially its article 2.4 located at page 77, which guides the process and describes how cash withdrawals by account holders and cash payment to third parties shall be done.
“Unfortunately, there is nothing providing for bank staff collecting or withdrawing cash on behalf of customers.
“I believe that the principles of natural justice viz: the rule against bias and the rule of fair hearing were complied with before the Claimant was summarily dismissed.
“The Claimant’s allegation that the dismissal is wrongful because the reasons for which she was dismissed were not as provided for in exhibit C20 is of no moment. I hold that the Defendant validly dismissed the Claimant.
“Regarding the second relief sought by the Claimant, the Defendant did not lead any evidence to support the facts pleaded in the Statement of Defence that she was responsible for withdrawing the total sum of N33, 653,000.00. It does seem to me that this is an allegation of crime which must ordinarily be proven beyond reasonable doubt.”
In all, His Lordship declared that the summary dismissal of the Claimant was not unlawful, wrongful, null and or void; and the accusation of her withdrawing the sum of N33,653,000.00 by means of fraud through three different account holders is unproven and unfounded.
The Court Ordered Defendant to pay 50% of her monthly salaries and other quarterly allowances paid during the period of April 21, 2006, to November 15, 2016(the periods she was placed on administrative suspension by the Defendant); full housing and transportation allowances and other benefits due to her from April 21 2016 up to November 15 2016; Remittance of all pension contributions to her Pension’s Manager and payment of any other outstanding or previous salaries or allowances owed before her dismissal in November 2016 among others within 30 days.
