Media
- Home
- Details
Portharcourt –His Lordship, Hon. Justice Z. M. Bashir, Judge of The National Industrial Court of Nigeria, Portharcourt Judicial division, on Wednesday 13th February 2019 in a ruling, overruled the preliminary objection filed by MARTIN CRAIGHEAD and 2 others (defendants/applicants) challenging the jurisdiction of the court to hear matter filled by MRS NNENNE ONEMU (for herself and on behalf of the dependents/beneficiaries of the estate of Mathias Oghale Onemu, the Deceased ) for being unmeritorious, directed parties to proceed with substantive suit.
This suit commenced by way of a general form of Complaint filed on the 2nd of August, 2017. The Claimant claiming against the Defendant among others; A DECLARATION that the claimant is entitled to employee compensation for the death of MATHIAS OGHALE ONEMU in the course of employment as a COORDINATOR/SUPERVISORINVENTORY in the defendants Company under Section 17(1)(a)(i) and 19 of the Employee Compensation Act, 2010.
Likewise, The sum of N404,887,896.00 (Four Hundred and Four Million and Eighth Hundred and Eighty Seven Thousand, Eight Hundred and Ninety Six Naira) being 90% of the total monthly remuneration of MATHIAS OGHALE ONEMU (Deceased) in the course of employment as a COORDINATOR/SUPERVISOR INVENTORY in the defendants Company for the claimant’s life time.
The Defendants, by the preliminary objection sought for AN ORDER of this Honourable Court striking out the Claimant’s Complaint for being defective and incompetent, AN ORDER of the Court declining jurisdiction as it relates to the 1stand 2ndDefendant/Applicant in this suit on the grounds that the instant Suit is incompetent ab initio and that the Court lacks jurisdiction to entertain and/or hear and determine the Claimant’s Suit as presently constituted and The leave of this Honourable Court was neither sought nor obtained for service of Claimant’s Complaint on the 1st& 2nd Defendants who admittedly are based outside the jurisdiction of this Honourable Court.
Counsel submitted that failure on the part of the claimant to effect proper service of the originating processes on a party to the suit or at least to establish that he has effected service on the party renders the suit incompetent and liable to be struck out for want of jurisdiction of the court as it relates to that party.
Counsel concluded by urging the court to decline jurisdiction in this suit as it relates to 1st and 2nd Defendant and accordingly to strike out their names.
Counsel then posited that the Complaint in the instant matter dated 2nd of August 2017, was issued in Port Harcourt, Rivers State. However, the said Complaint was purportedly served on BAKER HUGHES INCORPORATED, BAKER HUGHES COMPANY LIMITED 2nd& 3rd Defendants in Lagos State, outside the State of issuance.
In reaction to the preliminary objection, Claimant argued that by the National Industrial Court Act, 2006, the Jurisdiction of this Honourable Court is not divided into States.
The defendants also filed motion on notice requesting for an Order of the Honourable Court striking out the names of the 1st& 2nd Defendants/Applicants.
Counsel submitted that the contract of employment was between claimant/respondent’s deceased husband and the 3rd defendant/applicant and that Claimant has not disclosed any reasonable cause of action against 1st& 2nd defendants/applicants in all the paragraphs of his statement of facts.
After careful evaluation of all the processes filed, and the submissions of the learned Counsel from both sides. The Court presided by Hon. Justice Z. M. Bashir expressed thus;
“In view of the provision, the 2nd Defendant is averred to have Geomarket office in Nigeria which is without doubt a form of representation within the contemplation of Order 7 Rule 7 above and the cause of action complained of by the Claimant having accrued in Nigeria, service of the Originating process by the Claimant on the 2nd Defendant in Nigeria is appropriate and I so hold.
“Foremost, it must be emphatically stated that the National Industrial Court is a court with single jurisdiction as long as the cause of action arose within Nigeria.
“In view of the foregoing, the argument or contention of the Defendants/Applicants’ counsel, that the originating process for this suit is defective and incompetent because same was issued in Port-Harcourt, Rivers State and served in Lagos state on the 2nd and 3rd Defendants and that same is in contravention of the section 97 of the Sheriff and Civil Processes Act as there is no endorsement on same, is misconceived and same is accordingly discountenanced.
“I find that the preliminary objection is unmeritorious and same is accordingly overruled.
On motion of notice
“The Claimant has not averred facts which are personal to the 1st Defendant and which the 2nd and 3rd Defendants cannot defend. The 1st Defendant is therefore considered not to be a necessary party for the purpose of this suit and I so hold.
“In the final analysis, the application of the Defendants/Applicant succeeds and fails in part. Parties are therefore directed to proceed with the substantive suit.”
