R. TAIWO OLORUNTOBA-OJU & ORS V PROFESSOR P. A. DOPAMU & ORS

CORAM

CHRISTOPHER MITCHELL CHUIOA UMA-ENEH JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT

PARTIES

1. DR. TAIWO OLORUNTOBA-OJU (Chairman Academic Staff Union of ) Universities (ASUU) Unilorin Branch) 2.DR. BODE OMOJOLA (Vice-Chairman (ASUU) Unilorin Branch) 3.DR. YETUNDE OSUNFISAN 4. ADEYINKA BANWO 5.DR. SOLA ADEMILUKA 6.PROFESSOR BISI OGUNSINA (Head of Dept. of Linguistics Unilorin) APPELLANTS

RESPONDENTS

AREA(S) OF LAW

SUMMARY OF FACTS

The Appellants at the Federal High Court sought for determination of ten questions, declaratory and injunctive orders against the Respondents. The Respondents brought an application to either strike out or dismiss the suit on grounds, of misjoinder, abuse of court process and lack of jurisdiction which was granted. An unsuccessful appeal at the Court of Appeal, led to this appeal.

HELD

Appeal allowed. The Supreme Court held that the Federal High Court has jurisdiction to hear and determine the appellants case as it is not a trade dispute but declaration of rights of parties.

ISSUES

1. Whether the Court of Appeal was right in holding that the Federal High Court had no jurisdiction to entertain the plaintiffs/appellants’ case having regard to the provisions of S.251 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999, grounds 1 and 4 of the grounds of appeal.2. Whether the Court of Appeal was right in relying on the plaintiffs/appellants’ affidavit evidence instead of their claims/reliefs to hold that the Federal High Court had no jurisdiction to entertain the case.3. Whether the plaintiffs/appellants case was/is a Trade dispute and if so, whether the Court of Appeal was right in holding that the jurisdiction of the Federal High Court was ousted by Trade Dispute Act 1976 and Trade Disputes (Amendment) Decree 47 of 1992

RATIONES DECIDENDI

JURISDICTION OF THE NATIONAL INDUSTRIAL COURT

To give jurisdiction in all matters relating to disputes in employment matters to the National Industrial Court will clearly overburden a special purpose court which the National Industrial Court was designed to be. Per Oguntade JSC

MEANING OF TRADE DISPUTE

Section 47 of the Trade Disputes Act, Cap 432 Laws of the Federation 1990 defines a “Trade dispute” as meaning “any dispute between employers and workers or between workers and workers which is connected with the employment or non-employment or the terms of employment and physical conditions of work of any person.” Per Oguntade JSC

JURISDICTION OF THE NATIONAL INDUSTRIAL COURT

It seems to me too that to construe the interpretation clause in Section 47 of Cap 432, 1999 Laws of Federation as conferring on the National Industrial court the jurisdiction to adjudicate on all manner of disputes concerning employment matters would do a great violence to the provisions of Section 25 l(l)(q),(r ) and (s) of the 1999 Constitution. It would in my view take a more specific provisions of Cap 432 and not just an interpretation clause to have such a far reaching effect which overrides the clear provisions of section 251(l)(q), (r) and (s) of the Constitution. It cannot be overlooked that Cap. 432 being an existing law within the meaning of Section 315 of the 1999 Constitution cannot be given an effect which overrides the clear provisions of Section 251(1 (q), (r) and (s) of the 1999 Constitution. Any provision of an existing law which is in conflict with the provisions of the 1999 Constitution must be pronounced void to the extent of such inconsistency. Per Oguntade JSC

CASES CITED

1. Western Steel Works v. Iron & Steel Works Union of Nigeria & Ors. [1987] 1 N.S.C.C. 133 at 1402. University of Abuja v. Ologe [1996] [1996] 4 NWLR (Part 445) 706 at 722