Principles Applicable to the Termination of a Master-Servant Relationship?

CASE TITLE: WETIFE v. IGP & ORS (2024) LPELR-62453(CA)

JUDGMENT DATE: 13TH JUNE, 2024

PRACTICE AREA: LABOUR LAW

LEAD JUDGMENT: YARGATA BYENCHIT NIMPAR, J.C.A.

SUMMARY OF JUDGMENT:

INTRODUCTION:

This appeal borders on wrongful termination of employment.

FACTS:

This appeal is against the judgment of the National Industrial Court of Nigeria, sitting in the Ibadan Judicial Division and delivered by Honourable Justice E.N. AGBAKOBA on the 28th day of May, 2014.

The appellant was allegedly employed by the 1st and 2nd respondents as a Cadet ASP and had worked in various formations and commands of the Nigerian Police Force. He was later promoted to the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police (DSP) in 2007 and posted to the Nigeria Police College, Lagos, where he authored a book in 2008 titled “Human Rights and Good Policing.”. He averred that the book was approved and recommended for use in the Nigeria Police College. In 2011, he was invited to present his book to the Sergeant/Inspector Course Training Program. A month later, a petition was written to the first respondent alleging that members of staff of the Advance Training Wing (ATW) of the Police College were involved in corrupt practices.

The appellant and other officers were invited before a panel headed by the Commissioner of Police, Lagos State Command, Yakubu A. Akali, to respond to the allegation, which he did. The appellant was transferred to Oyo State Command. In 2011, a query for serious misconduct was served on him, which he replied to. He was invited by ACP Noah Adesoyin, Commander, Area F Command, Nigeria Police Force, Ikeja, where he was confronted with the allegation. Later on, he was invited by the Commandant of the Police College, Ikeja, and served a letter of dismissal. The details of his dismissal were published in The Guardian and The Punch Newspaper, respectively. He alleged that he was not given a fair hearing throughout the proceedings as he was not allowed to tender vital documents for his case. The respondents at the trial court did not appear nor file any process in defence of the action, despite the service of adequate hearing notices and other court processes filed by the appellant.

The trial court, after due consideration of the case, dismissed the claims of the appellant in their entirety for being speculative, lacking in merit, and misconceived.

The appellant, dissatisfied with the judgment of the trial court, appealed against it.

ISSUES FOR DETERMINATION:

The Court adopted the issues formulated by the appellant in the determination of the appeal, thus:

1. Whether having regards to the facts and circumstances of this case, the learned trial judge was not in error to have affirmed the dismissal of the Appellant from his employment?

2. Whether having regard to the pleadings and the burden of proof on the Appellant, the learned trial judge was not in error when he held that the failure on the part of the Appellant to plead and proof the conditions of service applicable to his employment is fatal to his case?

DECISION/HELD:

In the final analysis, the appeal was dismissed for lacking merit. The judgment of the trial Court was affirmed.

RATIOS:

• ACTION- DECLARATORY RELIEF(S): Whether a plaintiff seeking declaratory reliefs must rely on the strength of his case and not on the weakness of the defence
• ACTION- DECLARATORY RELIEF(S): Principles governing the grant of declaratory reliefs
• APPEAL- FORMULATION OF ISSUE(S) FOR DETERMINATION: Whether issue(s) formulated for determination in an appeal must arise from the ground(s) of appeal
• APPEAL- FRESH POINT(S) ON APPEAL: Effect of raising an issue for the first time on appeal without leave of Court where so required
• EVIDENCE- BURDEN OF PROOF/ONUS OF PROOF: Whether a plaintiff must rely on the strength of his case and not the weakness of the case of the defence
• EVIDENCE- BURDEN OF PROOF/ONUS OF PROOF: Whether he who asserts must prove
• EVIDENCE- WITHHOLDING EVIDENCE: Instance where the presumption of withholding evidence may be invoked
• LABOUR LAW- WRONGFUL DISMISSAL OF AN EMPLOYEE: Duty of an employee alleging wrongful dismissal
• LABOUR LAW- TERMINATION OF EMPLOYMENT/APPOINTMENT: Principles applicable to the termination of a master/servant relationship
• LABOUR LAW- REINSTATEMENT: Circumstances where court will not order reinstatement of an employee
• PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE- SPECULATION: Whether Court can act on speculations

To read the full judgment or similar judgments, subscribe to Prime or Primsol