CORAM

---

Cordelia Ifeoma Jombo-Ofo ,Justice court of Appeal

Biobele Abraham Georgewill, Justice court of Appeal

Ibrahim Wakili Jauro, Justice court of Appeal

---

PARTIES

---

1. THE NIGERIAN CUSTOMS BOARD

2. THE NIGERIAN CUSTOMS SERVICE

3. THE COMPTROLLER-GENERAL OF CUSTOMS

APPELLANTS 

---

MR. NATHANIEL EKA IJACHI

RESPONDENTS 

---

AREA(S) OF LAW

---

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW, CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, EMPLOYMENT LAW, PENSION LAW, CIVIL PROCEDURE, HUMAN RIGHTS, PUBLIC SERVICE LAW

 

---

SUMMARY OF FACTS

 The Respondent commenced action against the Appellants claiming reliefs related to his reinstatement and entitlements. He was reinstated by the Nigerian Customs Board and retired effective 23/8/2011. However, the reinstatement letter (Exhibit NE4) specified there would be no payment of arrears of salaries and emoluments. The Respondent claimed entitlement to arrears of salary from July 1985 to August 2011, as well as pension and gratuity. The trial court granted some of his claims but refused others, leading to both an appeal and cross-appeal.

 

---

HELD

---

1. The appeal succeeded in part – only regarding striking out the 2nd and 3rd Appellants as non-juristic persons.

2. The judgment of the National Industrial Court was affirmed regarding the Respondent’s entitlement to pension and gratuity.

3. On cross-appeal, the court held the Respondent was entitled to arrears of salary from July 1985 to August 2011.

 

---

ISSUES

---

1. Whether the lower Court acted erroneously when it held that the suit was not statute-barred.?

2. Whether the findings or decision of the lower Court that the 2nd and 3rd Appellants were juristic persons was not erroneous.?

3. Whether the lower Court was wrong in holding that the employment of the Respondent was statutory and granting some reliefs while refusing others.?

 

---

RATIONES DECIDENDI

---

LIMITATION OF ACTION – DETERMINATION OF WHEN CAUSE OF ACTION AROSE

---

“Ordinarily therefore, the Court would look at the time the Claimant alleges that his cause of action accrued to him and compare same with the date as endorsed on the Writ of Summons as to the date of filing of the Claimant’s suit, and if the time from the accrual of the cause to action to the date of the filing of the Writ of Summons is outside the limitation time as prescribed by law, then such a claim is Statute-barred.” – Per Biobele Abraham Georgewill, J.C.A.

 

---

PENSION RIGHTS – STATUTORY GUARANTEE OF PENSION RIGHTS

---

 “The right of any person, including the Respondent, in the Public Service of the Federation to receive pension or gratuity is guaranteed by law.” – Per Biobele Abraham Georgewill, J.C.A.

 

---

JURISTIC PERSONALITY – REQUIREMENT FOR STATUTORY CONFERMENT

---

“The mere creation of a body by Statute does not automatically confer on such body the status of a juristic person. The Statute must go further to expressly confer on such a body the legal status of a juristic person with the power to sue and be sued.” – Per Biobele Abraham Georgewill, J.C.A.

 

---

REINSTATEMENT – EFFECT OF REINSTATEMENT ON EMPLOYEE RIGHTS

---

“With the pardon and reinstatement of the Respondent into the service of the 1st Appellant, he was made anew, cleaned and cleared of all his former sins in the service of the 1st Appellant… He became born new and therefore stands in the service of the 1st Appellant, notwithstanding his immediate retirement, as unblemished.” – Per Biobele Abraham Georgewill, J.C.A.

 

---

STATUTORY EMPLOYMENT – EFFECT OF PUBLIC SERVICE RULES

---

“The Public Service Rules are not only a bye-law of the Constitution of Nigeria 1999 (as amended), but has added constitutional flavor to the employment governed thereby, of which the employment of the Respondent with the 1st Appellant was one of such employments.” – Per Biobele Abraham Georgewill, J.C.A.

 

---

ULTRA VIRES ACTS – LIMITATION ON ADMINISTRATIVE POWERS

---

“The conduct of the 1st Appellant as regrettably expressed in Exhibit NE4 has not the backing and or support of the relevant and extant laws that governs it operation in its relationship with the Respondent. It follows that such conducts are ultra vires the powers and rights of the 1st Appellant and therefore, unlawful as well as unconstitutional and liable to be struck down.” – Per Biobele Abraham Georgewill, J.C.A.

 

---

WAIVER – LIMITATION ON WAIVER OF CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS

---

 “A substantive constitutional right cannot be deemed waived merely because a weaker party was made to sign and or accept terms imposed on him by the stronger party in a negotiation for settlement of dispute, though a procedural constitutional right may be waived.” – Per Biobele Abraham Georgewill, J.C.A.

 

---

REFUSAL VS DISMISSAL OF CLAIMS – LEGAL EFFECT

---

 “In law whether a claim was refused or dismissed by a Court, it carries the same effect, so long it is not an order merely striking out a claim. This is so because a claim refused by a Court after trial cannot be relitigated, in the same manner a claim dismissed after trial can no longer be relitigated.” – Per Biobele Abraham Georgewill, J.C.A.

 

---

SALARY ARREARS – ENTITLEMENT UPON REINSTATEMENT

---

 “In law, once an employee is reinstated, he is by the operation of the law entitled to the payment of his salaries and wages for the intervening period.” – Per Biobele Abraham Georgewill, J.C.A.

 

---

SPECIAL DAMAGES – PROOF OF SALARY CLAIMS

---

 “The Cross-Appellant need not prove the claim for payment of his arrears of salaries, being not a claim founded on allegation of any crime, beyond reasonable doubt.” – Per Biobele Abraham Georgewill, J.C.A.

 

---

ADMINISTRATIVE DISCRETION – LIMITATION ON WITHHOLDING ENTITLEMENTS

---

“The 1st Appellant neither possesses nor has such powers, not only to go contrary to the relevant provisions of the extant laws and rules governing the employment of the Respondent and to treat the Respondent as a mere servant of a master, when his employment was protected by Statute.” – Per Biobele Abraham Georgewill, J.C.A.

 

---

STATUTORY EMPLOYMENT – NATURE OF PUBLIC SERVICE EMPLOYMENT

---

 “The relationship between the Respondent and the Board is not, nor was it intended to be, that of ordinary master-servant in which the servant holds the employment at the pleasure of the master.” – Per Biobele Abraham Georgewill, J.C.A.

 

---

FAIR HEARING – RAISING NEW ISSUES SUO MOTU

---

 “It is not the law that on every purely issue of law alone, a Court must invite the parties before it could raise, consider and resolve it.” – Per Biobele Abraham Georgewill, J.C.A.

 

---

CASES CITED

---

---

STATUTES REFERRED TO

---

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

2. Nigerian Customs Service Board Act

3. Public Officers Protection Act

4. Pension Reform Act 2014

5. Public Service Rules

6. Customs and Excise Management Act, Cap. C45, LFN 2004

CLICK HERE TO READ FULL JUDGEMENT