Media
- Home
- Details
Portharcourt – His Lordship, Hon. Justice Zainab Bashir of the National Industrial Court of Nigeria, sitting in Portharcourt, Rivers state, on Thursday 14th March 2019 in a judgment delivered validated employment termination of MRS. KROHAM ADAKWU (claimant) by INTEGRATED CATERING COMPANY LTD (1st defendant). The court held that the Defendants have not in any way breached the terms and conditions of the employment relationship in view of the facts and provisions of the Staff Condition of Service.
The suit commenced by way of a general form of Complaint filed on the 10th of August, 2018. The Claimant sought jointly and severally against the Defendants among others; A Declaration that the 2nd Defendant - Managing Director/CEO acted wrongfully in terminating the Claimant’s employment from the 1st Defendant. An order of the Honourable court directing the Defendants to pay the Claimant all her salaries/entitlements from the day her employment was wrongfully terminated till final determination of the suit.
Likewise, The sum of Five Million Naira (N5,000,000.00) for general damages.
Arising from the statement of fact, the Claimant was employed by the 1st Defendant sometime in September 2013 and later posted to a new sub-outlet along Omoku Road in River State as the sub-outlet head.
Sometime in March 2016 she was directed and ordered by the Managing Director to shut down operations due to the communal crisis in 2016 and its attendant security challenges and the threats it posed which affected the 1st Defendant’s business activities in Omoku Road and other neighbouring communities.
That since the time of the shutdown, she had not been re-posted to work in any other outlet or sub-outlet of the 1st Defendant. She wrote letters through her lawyer to be re-instated or be paid her entitlements if her services are no longer required but the Defendants outrightly refused, failed and neglected to heed the demand.
Defendants submitted that after claimant reported the incidence, she disappeared without reporting to the 1st Defendant’s headquarters for reposting and other necessary actions and her telephone number which was known to the Defendants was switched off and have relocated from the address supplied during employment.
Defendants posited that by the Handbook which states that being absent for 4-8 days is deemed to be self-termination from employment. He also posited that the Claimant could have been posted elsewhere if she had reported herself.
In opposition, Counsel to the claimant argued that the claimant was not given the opportunity or right to be heard in line with the principle of fair hearing and it is not just enough for the defendants to say that the claimant was incommunicado because of her phone which was switched off.
After careful evaluation of all the processes filed, and the submissions of the learned Counsel from both sides. The Court presided by Hon. Justice Zaynab Bashir expressed thus;
“What I find with regards to the obligation of deploying the Claimant after the incident of March 2016 is that the Claimant did not make herself available for work immediately after the shut down and that is not minding the fact that the Defendant is not mandated but rather has a discretion in deploying her owing to the persistent closure of the outlet where she worked.
“In this circumstance, notice is not required to be served on the Claimant for her to know the status of her employment as it has been foretold in the condition of service.
“For the sake of clarity, I find that the Defendants have not in any way breached the terms and conditions of the employment relationship between them and the Claimant in view of the facts and circumstances surrounding same and in view of the provisions of the Staff Condition of Service.
“It goes without saying therefore that the sole issue for determination is resolved against the Claimant to the effect that the Claimant is not entitled to the reliefs sought based on the facts and evidence before this court.
“In the final analysis, the case of the Claimant lacks merit and same is accordingly dismissed.”
