Lagos – The presiding Judge of the National Industrial Court of Nigeria, Lagos State Judicial division, His Lordship, Hon. Justice Benedict Kanyip on Wednesday 20th March 2019 in a judgment dismissed the case filed by Mr. Usanga Eyo Brian (claimant) against Polaris Bank Limited (defendant) for lacking merit. The court expressed that items of special damages must be strictly proved and the claimant showed none.
The court also held that it is within the disciplinary powers of an employer to suspend an employee for purposes of investigating an infraction or as punishment for an infraction.
The claimant had filed this case on 15th September 2014 sought against defendant among others; An order entering judgment for the claimant against the defendant in the sum of N11,498,738.34 (Eleven Million, Four Hundred and Ninety-Eight Thousand, Seven Hundred and Thirty-Eight Naira, Thirty-Four Kobo) being the total amount for the eight (8) months salaries and allowances owed to the claimant by the defendant.
The sum of N2,000,000.00 (Two Million Naira only) being the legal fees for the prosecution of this suit. An order entering judgment for the claimant against the defendant in the sum of N200,000.00 (Two Hundred Thousand Naira) only spent by the claimant in transportation while representing the defendant in court and going to the customers’s office to recover the said loan.
Likewise, An order setting aside the suspension of the claimant from duty by the defendant on the 23rd day of April 2010.
To the claimant, he was a staff of the defendant from 4th May 1981 to 22nd June 2012, having started work with the defendant’s predecessor, International Bank for West Africa (IBWA) Ltd as a clerk. in August 2011 Mainstreet Bank Limited acquired the assets and liabilities of Afribank Nig Plc and it became known as Mainstreet Bank Ltd. On 29th June 2015, Skye Bank Plc took over the assets and liabilities of Mainstreet Bank Ltd; and on 21st September 2018, Polaris Bank Ltd took over the assets and liabilities of Skye Bank Plc.
That in 2008, a customer applied for a credit facility where the customer’s account was domiciled. Shortly after repaying the loan, the said customer applied for another credit facility for a duration of 6 months. The application was processed and the Executive Management who finally approved same and the customer utilized the loan but at the end of the 6 months period, and was unable to pay off in line with the terms of approval and this led to the classification of the credit facility as non-performing.
On 23rd April 2010, the defendant directed through a letter that the claimant should proceed on suspension to recover the exposure of the bank. The claimant stayed for 8 months in suspension. During the period of suspension, he, however, approached the customer for repayment of the loan and the customer started making payment to the defendant until it fully repaid the loan together with accruing interest.
The claimant submitted among others for determination whether Mainstreet Bank Limited took over the assets and liabilities of Afribank Nigeria Plc, Whether the claimant should be denied the payment of his salaries and allowances having not been found guilty of any misconduct.
The claimant submitted that the foundation of his case is the impropriety of his suspension from work for 8 months without pay, which suspension was an act of harassment and victimization, unnecessary in the circumstances to suspend him without pay over non-performing credit that he did not grant.
After careful analysis of all the processes filed, and the submissions of the learned Counsel from both sides. The Court presided by Hon. Justice B. B. Kanyip expressed thus;
“Condition of service is silent on whether the claimant’s suspension was without pay. The assumption, therefore, is that the suspension is with pay since the defendant cannot suspend without pay in the absence of clear provisions to that effect in the conditions of service. The defendant supplied no conditions of service to prove that it can suspend without pay under the said conditions of service.
"The burden is on the defendant to prove that it paid the said salary and allowances to the claimant during the period of suspension since it did not show that it is covered by the conditions of service not to pay.
"To prove the quantum of the sums claimed, the rule regarding proof of special damages must be adhered to. This is because, the claim for “entitlements and/or benefits”, being monetary sums, is a claim for special damages.
"The claimant showed none to this Court. Instead, he relied heavily on the pleadings arguing that the defendant did not controvert his pleadings and so must be deemed to have admitted his claims.
“The claimant claims that he spent over N100,000 in repairing his car and no documents in this regard were tendered."
The court maintained that it is within the disciplinary powers of an employer to suspend an employee for purposes of investigating an infraction or as punishment for an infraction, thereby dismissed the case for lacking merit.
