By Estine Okolo
Abstract
Termination of Employment is the cessation of the services of an employee by an employer. In Nigeria, job loss is a recurrent phenomenon, especially in the organized private sector. Despite statutory interventions and attempts by government to control the rate of job loss through various policies, the trend has continued. This paper examines the different types of employment, statutory provisions to regulate it, required notices to be issued by either parties to avoid an infraction against the law , the rights of both the employer and employee, conditions upon which appointments can be validly terminated and the reliefs accruable to an employee for unlawful termination of his employment. It will also discuss some of the judicial decisions and pronouncements on the different modes of terminating appointments. Necessary recommendations were however made to guide parties on how to avoid the pitfalls of unlawful termination of appointment and steps to take when one’s appointment is unlawfully terminated.
Definition of Terms
Employment is the act of employing, the state of being employed, work for which one has been hired and is being paid by an employer.[1] Employer is a person who controls and direct a worker under an express or implied contract of hire and who pays the worker’s salary.[2]
Employ has been defined as to make use of, to hire, to use as an agent or substitute in transacting business, commission and entrust with the performance of certain acts or functions or with the management one’s affair.[3] An Employee is a person who works in the service of another person (the employer) under an express or implied contract of hire, under which the employer has the right to control the details of work performance.[4] Termination is defined as the act of ending something[5]. Termination of Employment can be described as the cessation of the services of an employee with or without benefits of cash and or kind[6]. Termination of Employment has also been defined as the complete severance of an employer-employee relationship, the end of something in time or existence, conclusion or discontinuance.[7] Yet, another author defined termination or Dismissal.[8]
“As the bringing to an end of employment relationship”…
He posits further that since a contract of employment is like any other commercial contract, in determining whether a cessation of employment has occurred, one has to look into the contract from which the relationship emanated.
Introduction
Recently, there have been rampant cases of termination of employments, largely due to the global financial meltdown and particularly, with the dwindling fortunes of the country’s economy. In Nigeria, incidences of termination of employment are a daily occurrence. Even as businesses fold up on a daily basis, new businesses are also being established. In turn, there has also been increase in litigations bothering on termination of employment and wrongful dismissals. The institutionalization of democracy has increased the awareness of the citizenry about their rights. Almost every one , inclusive of workers are ready, not only to challenge any infringements on their rights, but also to go the whole hug at ensuring redress is sought in the relevant and competent court of jurisdiction. In Nigeria, several workers face the bitter consequences of termination of their employments on a daily basis. Such acts leave in its wake devastating consequences not only for the workers but for the several family members and dependants who rely on them for survival. The intention of a letter of termination is essentially to put an end to the contract of employment. The Supreme Court stated the effect of a letter of termination of appointment thus; [9]
“Termination of appointment is intended always to put an end to any job or assignment one is holding. The issue of whether the person whose service is terminated accepts it or not does not arise. Even if the person whose appointment has being brought to an end by a letter of termination challenges it in court that does not mean that the employer had any other intention than to put an end to the job description held by subject of the termination letter.”
Employment and the pedigree of organization represents different thing to various people. To some, it is simply a source of livelihood, to others it is a sign of fulfilment and class status. Some however see it as something that must be kept as long as it meets the needs of the employee. With the communal nature of our society, an employment for one is also indirectly for his dependants because he also has to provide for their needs. It is therefore not surprising at the zeal by workers whose appointments are terminated to explore all legal means to ensure justice is done, especially in cases where the termination is unlawful. However, even though an employee owes the employer a duty to perform his duty in accordance with the terms of employment, the employer is also duty bound to provide what the employee will work with and more importantly to comply with the conditions for bringing the employment to an end. Essentially, the core principle of contract of employment, like all other contract is freedom to enter contract and freedom to choose the precise terms that form the legally enforceable obligation.[10]
Types of Employment
A contract of employment is defines in the Act to mean[11]
“ any agreement, whether oral or written, express or implied whereby one person agrees to employ another as a worker and that other person agrees to serve the employer as a worker”.
An employer is defined to mean
“any person who has entered into a contract of employment to employ any other person as a worker either for himself or for the service of any other person and includes the agent, manager or factory of the first mentioned person and the personnel representative of a deceased employer”.
In the same section, a worker is defined to mean[12]
“any person who has entered into or work under a contract with an employer, whether is for manual labour or clerical work or is expressed or implied or oral or written and whether it is a contract or service or a contract personally to execute any work or labour…”
It is noteworthy that the terms and conditions of a contract of employment are the pillars upon which the employment is built. They are the foundation upon which a case will be initiated par adventure the court may be approached to determine the propriety or otherwise of an action bothering on termination of employment. The principles guiding the termination of employment naturally depend on the nature of employment. The bedrock of employer-employee relationship is the contract of employment. Both the employer and employee are bound by the terms of the contract. Apart from the letter of appointment, other documents may be relied upon. Such documents may include circulars, letter of promotion, confirmation letter, commendation letter, the public service rules, disciplinary and grievance procedure depending on the nature of employment. It is the duty of a counsel to ask for these documents, study them and make up his mind on the necessary steps to take for the benefit of his client.
The different types of employment are discussed below:
- master and servant Employment.
Under this class of employment, there cannot be specific performance of contract of service. The master has the prerogative to bring to an end the contract between him and the servant and for any reason or for no reason at all. The termination of appointment must be in accordance with the manner provided by the contract, motive is however not relevant. However, if the master terminates the contract with his servant in a manner not provided for by the contract, the remedy to be sought is for payment of damages for breach of contract. The court will be unwilling to compel an unwilling employer to reinstate a servant. A master can terminate the appointment of a servant without giving any reason.[13] The court stated succinctly as follows;.
“No reason was given for the dismissal of the appellant as I
stated earlier in the course of this judgment, the master
can terminate the contract with his servant at any time and for
any reason or for none.”
It was also further held that where an employee has been found guilty by a Disciplinary Committee of any gross misconduct, the master has a choice either to exercise his or its discretion in favour of prosecuting the erring servant or dismissing him summarily as in the instant case. In other words, prosecution before a court of law is not a condition precedent for summary dismissal, though scholars and rights advocates have argued severally that the provisions of Section 36(4) of the Constitution of Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999(as amended)[14] should be adhered to when an employer is involved in allegations bothering on crime. The purport of Section 36(4) of the Constitution of Nigeria (supra) is to the effect that allegations bothering on crime must first be proved by a court of law. Hence, the master is expected to ensure that allegation of crimes are proved against their servants before terminating the employment.However, in the case of an unconfirmed employee, he or she does not enjoy the same privileges which a confirmed employee enjoys. No particular procedure is expected to be followed, once there is good reason for the termination of employment and the provisions of the contract are complied with.
It is also not proper to dismiss or terminate the appointment of a staff when a matter has been reported to the police and the employee is being prosecuted by a competent court of jurisdiction. The Supreme Court was emphatic in stating this position thus[15]
“It is not in dispute that the appellant dismissed the respondent from service while his trial by the Magistrate Court was still ongoing. This is where the appellant goofed. Let me explain, having referred the matter to the police for investigation, the appellant was bound to wait for the outcome of the trial. The respondent was liable to dismissal only if he was convicted by court.”
In all these, the importance of the terms of the contract of service cannot be over emphasized. The obligation of the contracting parties carries with it the sanctity of the contract which must not be treated with levity, especially by the employer.
- Statutory Employment or Employment with statutory flavour.
An employment with statutory flavour is one which is provided for in a statute. It clothes the employee with a legal status than the ordinary master and servant relationship. The rules and regulations which must be part of the terms and conditions of employee’s appointment capable of giving him a statutory flavour and protection must have the following characteristics:
- statutory reinforcement or mandatory
- be directly applicable to the employee or person of his cadre
- be seen to be intended for the protection of that employment
- Must have been breached in the course of determining the employment, before they can be relied on to challenge the validity of that determination.
It will be wrong for an employer to terminate an employee whose employment has statutory flavour in any manner inconsistent with the provisions of the employment contained in the statute. The Supreme Court held as follows[16].
“Employment with a statutory backing must be terminated in the way and manner prescribed by that statute. Any other manner of termination inconsistent with the relevant statute is null and void and no effect”
The Supreme Court held further that the Civil Service Commission is not empowered to delegate any of its disciplinary procedures to any another government agency and that where, another department of government veer into matter of discipline by recommending action that can be taken against an officer of a pensionable cadre, such steps will be null and void.
In a nutshell, for an employment to qualify as that of a statutory flavour, there must be express provisions (of statutory reinforcement and usually mandatory) to be followed when there is need to terminate an employee’s appointment and the provisions must be complied with. In a decided case[17], the plaintiff at the lower court, Dr Victor Igwillo joined the services of Central Bank of Nigeria after working for 18 years with Anambra State University of Technology. Within three months of his employment at the Central Bank of Nigeria, he was alleged to have committed grave misconduct. He was then suspended and the matter referred to the Disciplinary Committee, where he denied the allegations against him. Even though, the committee found no merit in the allegations against him, he received his appointment was terminated. No reason was given and there was no reference to the outcome of the Disciplinary Committee which looked into the allegations against the plaintiff. The plaintiff instituted an action for reinstatement among other claims. The suit was dismissed for lack of merit at the lower court. The plaintiff appealed to the Court of Appeal and the appeal was allowed. Dissatisfied with the decision of the Court of Appeal, the defendant/appellant appealed to the Supreme Court where the appeal was unanimously dismissed and the decision of Court of Appeal was upturned in favour of the plaintiff at the court of first instance. The Supreme Court held as follows;
“That the 1st appellant being a creation of statute is duty bound to act within and under the powers conferred on it by the relevant statute creating it. Any action taken outside such powers, such as happened in this case will be ultra vires, null and void. Neither the suspension of the plaintiff nor his eventual termination is lawful as both run contrary to the provisions of the appellant’s staff manual”
iii. Employment at will or servant holding on office at pleasure
As the name suggest, this is a form of employment held at the will and caprices of the employer. Unlike employment with statutory favour, the continuous engagement of the employee is at the discretion of the one who engages the services of the employee. For example, a minister of the Federal Republic of Nigeria is employed by the President and Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces; therefore he holds that office at the pleasure of Mr President. The same thing also applies to the personal aids of the employer. One noticeable fact about this type of employment is that such employees are most often aware of this fact. Their continual stay at the employment is at the pleasure of whoever employ them. One major disadvantage of this type of employment is that loyalty is usually to the employer not necessarily for the general good of the masses. In some cases, it is mandatory that appointment be made into a particular office but it not compulsory that a particular staff must be kept. No doubt, the employer has discretionary powers as to who to hire.
Condition for Termination of Employment
The contractual nature of employment cannot be over emphasised. Over the years, statutory intervention has been introduced to provide a guide to the relationship and at times, sanctions and payment of damages may follow. The Labour Act provide as follows; [18]
” that not later than 3 months of a worker commencing work with an employer, the employer shall give to the worker a written statement specifying the name of the employer or group of employer and the undertaking which the worker is employed, name and address of the worker, place and date of engaging him, nature of the employment, date of contract and when it expires, appropriate duration of notice to be giving by either party if they intend terminating the appointment, rate of wages and method of calculation thereof and manner and period of payment any terms and conditions relating to hour of work, holiday, incapacity due to sickness or injury and any special conditions of the contract”.
This provision captures what is expected of an employer within 3 months of engaging a worker to work for him or his establishment. This statutory intervention is indeed a welcome development. It shows the importance attached to employment. On the other hand, the Labour Act also provided for the conditions upon which an appointment may be terminated thus; [19]
“A contract shall be terminated
- by the expiry of the period for which it was made or
- by the death of the worker before the expiry of that period or
- by notice in accordance with section 11 of this Act or in any other way in which a contract is legally terminable or held to be terminated”
- Termination by expiration of period
Under the common law, an employer or employee can terminate a contract of employment subject to the terms of the written contract, when the tenure of such a contract expires without a new contract of employment entered into either in writing or by conduct. Normally, contracts of employment usually have duration. Upon afflux ion of time, if the contract is not renewed, the contract automatically comes to end.
Generally, the commonest mode of terminating a contract of employment by either of the parties (employer or employee) is by giving notice of termination of the employment contract to the other party. The contract automatically ends at the expiration of the notice given. On the alternative, either of the parties may elect to pay compensation or a stated amount in lieu of the notice or employee may continue to work for the employer during pendency of the notice of termination. It is not necessary to provide any reason(s) for the termination of an employee’s appointment. The motive for terminating the employment contract is also not relevant.
Decided cases have shown that Nigerian courts do not normally grant specific performance of contract of employment in the private sector. The courts usually exercise this caution because the court will not impose an employee on an unwilling employer.
- Termination by death
On the part of employer, once he dies, the contract of employment is automatically brought to an end. This is based on the principle that it is only contracting parties to a contract that are bound by the terms of the Agreement. However, whether the contract will continue after the demise of the employer depends on the nature of the company or the administrators of the deceased estate.
iii. Termination by giving required Notice
Most contract of employment usually provide for the duration of notice to be given by the terminating parties. Such contract of employment usually provide for 3 month salary in lieu of notice or the 3 month notice by either parties.
- Termination on ground of misconduct.
Gross misconduct can be defined as unlawful, grave and weighty behaviour or actions which undermine the confidence which exists between the employee and employer or which is against the overall interest of the employer. When an employee is guilty of gross misconduct, he could be dismissed summarily without notice or wages. It is worthy of mention here that it is very important that before implementing the necessary punishments, the rules of fair hearing should be complied with. The employee must be given an opportunity to hear the allegations against him, explain or defend himself before the employer takes any decision that will affect the employee’s proprietary right.
Honourable Justice Iguh (as he then was) held as follows;[20]
“Where an employer dismisses or terminates the appointment of an employee on ground of misconduct all that the employer need establish to justify his action is to show that the allegation was disclosed to the employee that he was given a fair hearing, that is to say that the rules of natural justice were not breached”.
- Termination of Employment on ground of criminal offences
It is my humble opinion that to equate the commission of criminal offence with mere misconduct or gross misconduct will amount to a mere sophistry, even though there are instances where it may not be easy to differentiate one from another . They are entirely two different things and they carry different legal implications for the employee, depending on the employers approach to such issues. Where there are allegations of the commission of criminal offence against a person, which has also been denied by the accused person, the person or authority making the accusation must satisfy the constitutional requirement by establishing the guilt of the accused person according to the provisions of the law.
In a decided case where the Appellate court found that the employee never admitted stealing the sum of eleven million naira and was neither confronted with the allegation before she was dismissed, the court held that there was a need to establish her guilt in a competent court or judicial tribunal before her dismissal. The position of law on the need to first prove the guilt of an accused is enumerated in a judicial decision.[21] In another case, the Supreme Court was of the opinion that when there is misconduct bothering on criminality, all that is required of an employer before summarily dismissing an employee is to give him fair hearing by confronting him with the accusation made against him and requiring him to defend himself. The employer may not necessarily need the employee to be convicted by a court of competent jurisdiction before dismissing the employee[22].
When an allegation of crime has been denied by an employee, the burden will then shift to the accuser to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the crime has been committed. The Supreme Court reinforced this position in a popular case thus;[23]
“There is under our law no sliding scale of element of satisfaction as to the guilt of a person of an offence. The appearance of guilt is not delusory appearance of guilt. The appearance of guilty which can satisfy this action is measured by the quantum of proof ad laid down by law. It is for this reason that guilt in criminal matters is left for the ascertained of court of law or other tribunals before it is accepted and acted upon by administrative tribunals before it is accepted and acted upon by administrative tribunal.”
Any exercise of judicial powers by an investigative committee or panel will not stand in the face of the law. The courts usually frown at such actions and it is not surprising that the Supreme Court did the same[24]
“Where there is an accusation of commission of criminal offences, the burden of proof to be established by the accuser before a criminal tribunal established by law is that the commission of the offence has been proved beyond reasonable doubt. An administrative body cannot usurp the constitutional functions of the court by making finding of guilt in such cases.”
The facts of one of the notable cases on termination of appointment by an employer are as
follows;. [25]
The appellants who were staff of the University of Lagos, having earlier been offered
Appointments as Professors of Zoology, Law and Educational Psychology respectively by the
University of Lagos, had their appointments terminated based on the report of a Visitation Panel.
Amongst the documents tendered, received in evidence and considered by the court at first
instance were letters of offer of appointment, acceptance of offer, memorandum of appointment,
a copy of regulations governing service in the University, letter of termination of appointment, a
rejection of the purported termination of appointment, and a return of cheque for 6 months salary
in lieu of notice between the parties. After hearing the evidence of the parties, the trial Judge
Bada J held that the purported termination of the appointments of each of the plaintiffs was ultra-
vires and contrary to the provisions of section 17 of the University of Lagos Act 1967 (as
amended) . It was also ordered that the plaintiffs should be restored to their post, offices and to
all rights attached hereto .Aggrieved by the decision of the lower court, the defendant appealed
to the Court of Appeal, Lagos Division, alleging error in law and misdirection. The appeal was
allowed and the judgment of the lower court was set aside. The Plaintiff /Appellant appealed to
the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court threw up well researched ratios ranging from
administrative law as it relate to the doctrine of ultra-vires Labour Law on master and servant
relationship, and the conditions under which a master can dismiss his servant, whether the motive
of an employer is relevant in terminating a contract of employment. On practice and procedure, the
difference between the rule and principle, nature of a rule, meaning of the words Dismissal, reinstatement.
On the governing law in Contract of Employment, Karibi Whyte JSC held as follows[26];
“Contract of employment like all other contract, their creation and termination
are both subject to general principles governing the law of contract. Hence,
where the contract of employment is in writing,, the parties are bound by the
express terms and conditions stipulated”
The Supreme Court held further that the Plaintiffs appointments and services were regulated by statute
and the regulations made hereunder. The Court held further that the relationship between the Appellant
and the Respondent was beyond that of master and servant. And the judgment of the lower court which
reinstated the Appellant to their positions was restored.
5.0 Remedies available under the different types of Employment
Unlawful termination of Employment or appointment comes with its attendant effect on the adverse party. Various redress available to the different categories of employment depending on their nature is discussed below;
- Master/Servant Relationship
In the event of an unlawful termination of employment when it is of master and servant relationship, the servant will only be entitled to damages. He will not be entitled to re-instatement. It is based on the principle that the court will not impose a willing servant on an unwilling master even if the master did not follow the normal procedure in bringing the contract to an end. The Supreme Court succinctly and without any iota of ambiguity stated this position when it held thus;[27]
“It is settled that an employee cannot compel the employer to retain him no matter how desirable that may be on humanitarian or other grounds. In as much the same way an employer cannot compel an employee to remain in his service no matter how indispensable his services may be to the employer”.
As for the measure of damages, for wrongful termination, the employee is only entitled to salaries and benefits he would have earned within the period of notice as contained in the contract of employment between parties. This is because damages are not intended to give a servant a wind fall. The damages recoverable are usually the salary and entitlements that is due to the servant within the period that a notice ought to have been given. Damages may also include legitimate allowances, commission, bonus, pension and gratuity already accrued to the employee at the time the appointment was wrongful terminated. It is doubtful whether an employee, who is wrongfully dismissed or terminated, can recover damages for loss of reputation and injury.
- Termination of Employment for a fix term.
The appropriate damages payable in this case is the amount the employee would have earned over the period the employment ought to have lasted or the unexpired term. It means that the damages would constitute the full amount of salary, allowances and other entitlements which the employer would have been entitled to, if the contract of service had run its full course. However, the amount may be reduced slightly for being paid as a lump sum. The damages awardable under this category may further be slightly reduced, considering the age and the opportunity of the employee to obtain a new appointment.However, in the case of an employee who is an expatriate, additional sum may be awarded to compensate for his alien status.
iii. Employment created and with statutory flavour
One of the remedies an employee is entitled to under this kind of employment is that of reinstatement. Once the provision of an employment and removal is created under the statute, if such a provision is not complied with in determining the contract, such action will be unlawful, null and void. The Supreme Court, per Karibi Whyte JSC (as he then was) stated the status of a contract of employment with statutory flavour thus;[28]
“It is now accepted that where the Contract of Service is governed by the provisions of statute or where the conditions of service are contained in the regulations derived from statutory provisions, they invest the employee with a legal status higher than the ordinary master-servant. They accordingly enjoy statutory flavour.”
In case of employment with statutory flavour, matters of discipline, tenure of office and termination of the appointment of such an employee, the procedures laid down by the applicable statute must be followed or else any action that is contrary to the procedures will not stand in the face of the law. The law will be quick in declaring the illegality of such an action. However, the fact that an organization is statutory in nature does not mean that its employees must enjoy an employment with stator flavour. Apart from reinstatement, the court could also order that the salary and other entitlements due to the employee within the period for which his employment was terminated be paid to him or her. In what is rather a novel judgment, for the first time in Nigeria, the Supreme Court ordered reinstatement in a private sector employment[29],
It was the view of the Supreme Court of Nigeria that being a Director and later a Managing Director of First Bank Nig Ltd, whose office as a director is regulated by statute, i.e. the Companies and Allied Matters Act 2004, qualifies him as one whose office is spiced with statutory flavour. The salient and important point about this case is that, it not only expanded the domain of the categories of employment with statutory flavour, it introduced a new aspect to the law as regard employment with statutory flavour. Even though opinions are divided about the judgment in this case, it marked a watershed in the termination of appointment related cases. It is hoped that in the nearest future, the Supreme Court will have other opportunity to espouse more on the rationale for such a decision.
Facts to be pleaded in case of unlawful termination
In actions relating to unlawful termination, certain facts must be pleaded. It is a trite law that evidence not pleaded goes to no issue. The employee must specifically plead that;
i.He or she is employed by the defendant. Without Employment there cannot be termination of Employment.
ii.The terms, conditions of the employment, duration and termination of the employment must be pleaded. These conditions are usually contained in the letter of appointment, regulations, condition of service and other instruments relating to the employment.
iii.The employee must also plead who can appoint and remove the employer. There is a need to plead this fact, especially when it amount to unjust termination and by person not empowered to do so.
iv.The person whose appointment has been terminated will have to plead the circumstances upon which his appointment can be terminated.
v.That his appointment can only be terminated by a person or authority other than the defendant. Documents relevant to establish his case include but not limited to letter of offer/contract of employment, handbook/expatriate policy (if it involves an expatriate) letter of confirmation, letter of promotion, letter of termination and other workplace documents must be attached.
Court with Jurisdiction to adjudicate on matter relating to termination of Employment.
Before now, the Federal High and State High Courts had jurisdiction to adjudicate on matters relating to employer /employee relationships. However, by virtue of a new section 254(A) of the Constitution of Nigeria 1999 as amended,(Third Alteration) such matter can only be entertained by the National Industrial Court. The Constitution of Nigeria 1999 as amended states as follows;[30]
“Notwithstanding the provisions of section 251, 257, 272 and anything contained in this constitution and in addition as may be conferred upon it by an Act of the National Assembly, the National Industrial Court shall have and exercise jurisdiction to the exclusion of any other court in Civil cause and matter relating to and connected with any Labour, employment, conditions of service, including health, safety, welfare of labour, employee, worker and matters incidental these to or connected there with.”
The rules of the National Industrial Court can be cited as the National Industrial Court Rules 2007 and were made pursuant to the National Industrial Court Act 2006.
Conclusion
Employment relationships are not created in vacuum. It comes with rights, obligations, and duties, depending on the agreement amongst parties involved. Unlawful termination of appointment without recourse to the prescribed procedures usually throw up legal issues .There should be conscious efforts to comply with the rules of natural justice, especially when there are elements of criminality in the allegation against an employee. The usurpation of the roles of the court should be avoided because the court will never fold its hands and watch while its duties are being eroded. Unnecessary litigations will be avoided if the statutory provisions or terms of the contract are complied with. Indeed it is cheaper this way than to be involved in litigations which may be time consuming, unpredictable and expensive to maintain and pursue.
⃰ LLB,(Ibadan)BL,LLM (In view)
[1] Byran A Garner, Black’s Law Dictionary, 7th edition
[2] Ibid
[3] Ibid
[4] Ibid
[5] Ibid
[6] Federal Republic of Nigeria Official Gazette, No 87, Government Notice No 208 volume 100
[7] Blacks Law Dictionary (Supra)
[8] Oladosu Ogunniyi,Nigerian Labour and Employment Law in Perspective , Published by Folio Publishers Ltd (2004)
[9]Jombo v PEF (2005) 12 Monthly Judgment of Supreme Court, page 123 at 125
[10] Hughes Collins ,KD Ewin &Ailem McColgan, Labour Law Text and Materials, published by Oxford- Portland, Oregon(2001)
[11] Section 91 (1) (b) of Labour Act Chapter 198,LFN 1990 now, L1 LFN 2004
[12] Section 91 of Labour Act
[13] Olarinwaju v Afribank (2001) 7 Supreme Court, pt III page 1 at pg 20
[14] It provision is to the effect that when any person is charged with a criminal offence, he shall be entitled to fair hearing in public by a court of Law
[15]Nigerian Port Authority v Ajobi (2006) 7 Supreme Court, pt 1 page 34
[16] EP Iderima V River State Civil Service (2005) 16 NWLR ,pt 951,page 378
[17] Central Bank of Nigeria &Anor v Igwillo(2007)4-5 SC page154 at 157
[18] Section 7 of Labour Act 2004
[19] Section 9(7) of Labour Act 2004
[20]University of Calabar V Essien (1996) 10 NWLR pt 477, 225 at 262
[21] Ekperokun v Unilag (1986) 3 NWL.R(pt 34) 163
[22]Arinze v First Bank (2004)5 SC (PT) page 160.
[23]Garba v University of Maiduguri (1986) INWLR, pt 18) page 55
[24]Dongtoe V Civil Service Commission Plateau State
[25] CI Olaniyan &2Others v Univesity of Lagos (1985)(NWLR)Pt 9, 599 0r 1985 LPELR SC/53/1985
[26] Page 133 ,Paragraphs (a-c) of the Judgment
[27] Odinkenmere v Impresit Bakolori Nig Ltd 1995) 8 NWLR pt 11 page 52 at 66
[28]Imoloame v Waec(1992) 3 NSCC, 37 at 38
[29]Bernard Longe v First Bank of Nigeria Plc (2010) 6 Nigerian Weekly Law Report ,page 1189
[30] Section 254(c )(1)(a) Constitution of Nigeria 1999 as amended
Estine Okolo is an Attorney at Law, based in Osobgo, Osun State
Email Address: estineokolo@yahoo.com
