CORAM

---

Uwani Musa Abba Aji Justice of the Supreme Court of Nigeria

Adamu Jauro Justice of the Supreme Court of Nigeria

Chioma Egondu Nwosu-Iheme Justice of the Supreme Court of Nigeria

Obande Festus Ogbuinya Justice of the Supreme Court of Nigeria

Habeeb Adewale Olumuyiwa Abiru Justice of the Supreme Court of Nigeria

---

PARTIES

---

MR. SHEHU YAUTE DAMISA

APPELLANTS 

---

UNITED BANK FOR AFRICA

RESPONDENTS 

---

AREA(S) OF LAW

---

EMPLOYMENT LAW, CONTRACT LAW, CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE, DAMAGES, ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, BANKING LAW, EVIDENCE LAW

 

---

SUMMARY OF FACTS

The Appellant was the Senior Manager (Commercials) at the Kaduna Branch of the Respondent bank. While in that position, he was found guilty of gross negligence in handling the account of Nasara Properties, where third-party cheques of Tanko Kokwain and Anthony Sule valued at N3.5 million and N2.5 million respectively were converted, allegedly by one Aliyu Odoh, the alter ego of Nasara Properties. The Appellant had negligently authorized the opening of the account without conducting a search. Upon discovery of this irregularity, the Appellant was queried. In his response (Exhibit 10), the Appellant admitted his negligence, leading to his dismissal. Subsequently, the Appellant filed a suit seeking declarations that his suspension and dismissal were ultra vires, null, void, and unconstitutional, claiming it denied him fair hearing. He also sought reinstatement, payment of accrued salaries and benefits, or alternatively, special and aggravated damages for unlawful dismissal.

 

---

HELD

---

1. The appeal was dismissed.

2. The Court affirmed that in a master-servant relationship without statutory flavor, dismissal cannot be declared null and void; the only remedy available is damages for wrongful dismissal.

3. The Court upheld the concurrent findings of the two lower courts, finding no reason to disturb them.

4. The Court awarded costs of One Million Naira against the Appellant.

 

 

---

ISSUES

---

1. Whether the Court of Appeal was right when it affirmed the dismissal of Appellant’s reliefs 1-3 by the trial Court ?

2. Whether the Court of Appeal was right when it affirmed the trial Court’s decision that based on the evidence and pleadings on record, the Appellant was not entitled to any form of damages in this case ?

3. Whether the Court of Appeal was right when it affirmed the trial Court’s decision awarding the sum of N1,588,336.65 to the Respondent in respect of its counterclaim ?

 

 

---

RATIONES DECIDENDI

---

MASTER-SERVANT RELATIONSHIP – NATURE AND SCOPE OF EMPLOYMENT WITHOUT STATUTORY FLAVOR

---

“Indeed, a master is entitled to dismiss his servant from his employment for good or bad reasons or for no reason at all.” – Per CHIOMA EGONDU NWOSU-IHEME, J.S.C

 

---

WRONGFUL DISMISSAL – DETERMINATION OF WRONGFULNESS IN CONTRACT OF SERVICE

---

“In the circumstances what determines the wrongfulness or otherwise, the plaintiff dismissal, is the contract of service and not any notion of fair hearing.” – Per CHIOMA EGONDU NWOSU-IHEME, J.S.C.

 

---

ULTRA VIRES ACTS – SCOPE OF EMPLOYER’S AUTHORITY TO TERMINATE EMPLOYMENT

---

“The expression ‘ultra vires’ means without power or authority. The Appellant was without doubt employed by the Respondent who as hirer also had a right to fire him.” – Per CHIOMA EGONDU NWOSU-IHEME, J.S.C.

 

---

RETIREMENT AGE – EFFECT OF CONTRACTUAL PROVISIONS ON EMPLOYMENT RIGHTS

---

“If I understand the Appellant, remaining in the Respondent’s employment could under no circumstances at all have been disturbed until he attained the age of 55 years. That would indeed be preposterous.” – Per CHIOMA EGONDU NWOSU-IHEME, J.S.C.

 

---

EVIDENCE – EFFECT OF UNCHALLENGED EVIDENCE

---

“As there is no refuttal of Exhibit 18 by the plaintiff, I think I am entitled to act on this unchallenged piece of evidence.” – Per CHIOMA EGONDU NWOSU-IHEME, J.S.C.

 

---

SPECIAL DAMAGES – REQUIREMENT OF SPECIFIC PROOF

---

“The Appellant has not discharged this obligation, and indeed, having failed to establish any wrong against him, proving special damages was an impossible task.” – Per CHIOMA EGONDU NWOSU-IHEME, J.S.C.

 

---

REINSTATEMENT – LIMITATIONS IN MASTER-SERVANT RELATIONSHIP

---

“The Supreme Court will not interfere with concurrent findings of fact of both the High Court and the Court of Appeal, supported by the evidence on record unless special circumstances are shown.” – Per CHIOMA EGONDU NWOSU-IHEME, J.S.C.

 

---

CONCURRENT FINDINGS – ATTITUDE OF SUPREME COURT

---

“Where an employer terminates an ordinary master-servant in contravention of the agreement of the parties, the termination cannot be declared null and void, neither can the employee be reinstated because a Court will not impose a willing employee on an unwilling employer.” – Per ADAMU JAURO, J.S.C.

 

---

FAIR HEARING – SCOPE IN EMPLOYMENT MATTERS

---

“Assuming that was even the reason for his dismissal, the Appellant was allowed to make written representations. That sufficed for the purpose of fair hearing.” – Per ADAMU JAURO, J.S.C.

 

---

STATUTORY FLAVOR – EFFECT ON EMPLOYMENT REMEDIES

---

“It is discernible from the record, the bedrock of the appeal, that the contract inter partes was not clothed with statutory flavour with attendant benefit of reinstatement into his employment.” – Per OBANDE FESTUS OGBUINYA, J.S.C.

 

---

PROOF OF INDEBTEDNESS – EFFECT OF DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE

---

“By virtue of exhibits 12 – 19, it is crystal clear that the respondent granted various loans to the Appellant which were not fully discharged in terms of repayment.” – Per OBANDE FESTUS OGBUINYA, J.S.C.

 

---

BURDEN OF PROOF – REQUIREMENT TO SHOW EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES

---

“The Appellant, in his infinite wisdom, starved the Court of any exceptional circumstances that will compel this Court to disturb the immaculate concurrent findings of the lower Courts.” – Per OBANDE FESTUS OGBUINYA, J.S.C.

 

---

TERMINATION OF EMPLOYMENT – SCOPE OF EMPLOYER’S RIGHTS

---

“The Respondent’s letter dismissing the Appellant contained reason for the dismissal. In my view, this does not give the Appellant any reason to complain since an employer is entitled to terminate an employee’s employment for no reason at all.” – Per ADAMU JAURO, J.S.C.

 

---

CASES CITED

---

---

STATUTES REFERRED TO

---

1. Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 (as amended)

2. Evidence Act 2011

3. Senior Staff Conditions of Service (UBA)

 

CLICK HERE TO READ FULL JUDGEMENT