Media

Image

Just In: Industrial Court Dismisses Claim, Awards Counter-Claim of N500, 000 General Damages In Favour of SGS Inspection Services Nig. Ltd

  • 1668 Thursday 21st June 2018

                     

 

Lagos---His Lordship, Hon. Justice J. D. Peter of the National Industrial Court of Nigeria, Lagos Judicial Division on Thursday 21st June 2018 in a Judgment delivered dismissed case of the Claimant Elizabeth Otakponmwenh brought against SGS Inspection Services Nigeria Limited in its entirety for lacking in merit and declared that letter of disengagement from service dated 19/11/12 is lawful, binding, subsisting and done in accordance with the employment agreement, also ordered claimant  to pay Defendant/Counter claimant sum of =N=300,000.00 as cost of this action.

 

On the 6th of November, 2014, the Claimant approached this Court claimed against the defendant the total sum of =N=12,644,139.81 being the outstanding of her retirement benefits.

 

The Defendant entered an appearance and filed its statement of defence on 15/5/15 together with all requisite frontloaded processes and counter claimed among others; A declaration that the termination by the Counter-Claimant, of the employment of        the Defendant by Counter-Claim vide letter of disengagement from service dated 19th November, 2012, is lawful, binding, subsisting and done in accordance with   the employment agreement dated 9th October, 2010 and A declaration that the Defendant by Counter-claim having received her termination benefits in full and her pension, is not entitled to any remuneration whatsoever from the Counter-Claimant either as retirement benefits or for any other purpose.

 

Under cross examination, the Claimant testified that she joined the employment of Defendant in 20/9/07; that the appointment was terminated on 19/11/12; that she was 54 years old then; that she was General Manager/Head of Human resources; that her severance package upon termination of employment; that on 21/11/12 the termination of her appointment was converted to voluntary retirement; that her letter of voluntary retirement was prepared in October 2013; that the reason for the conversion of termination to retirement was because she complained to the Managing Director about her termination and requested him to consider converting the termination to retirement.

 

 

 

The crux of the submission of learned Counsel for the defendant on these issues is that the appointment of the Claimant had earlier been lawfully terminated; that the Claimant was paid all her terminal entitlements; that at that point she ceased to be a staff of the Defendant and that she had no employment from which she could have voluntarily retired in October, 2013.

 

Learned Counsel prayed the Court to dismiss the claims of the Claimant and grant the counter-claims sought by the Defendant.

 

After reviewing the argument, processes filed and oral submissions of learned Counsel for the parties, the Court Presided by Hon. Justice J. D. Peters expressed thus;

 

 

“…It is also my finding that the letter of disengagement served on the Claimant was not at any point in time withdrawn by the Defendant. Therefore, resolving issue 1, I hold that the employment of the Claimant was lawfully terminated by the Defendant.

 

 

“…It appears obvious that the Claimant is certainly not qualified for voluntary retirement from the Defendant. There is no evidence that she was up to 60 years of age. There is no evidence that she put in up to 10 years in the service of the Defendant and neither is there evidence of having served for not less than 15 years so as to be entitled to early retirement. Having resolved the first 2 issues against the Claimant and in favor of the Defendant, I further hold that the Claimant is not entitled to any of the reliefs sought. Claimant was properly disengaged and dully paid all her terminal entitlements which she did not deny. I hold that she is not entitled to be paid any sum of money for any reason whatsoever.”

 

His Lordship ordered Claimant to pay Defendant/Counter claimant sum of =N=300,000.00 as cost of this action and the sum of =N=500,000.00 as general damages for    the unwarranted embarrassment and harassment to the Defendant/Counter claimant.

 

Lastly, all the terms of this Judgment are to be complied with within 30 days from today.

 

For Full Judgement, Click Here

Share Via WhatsApp

Latest News