Disable Preloader

CaseLaw

Ajayi V. Texaco Nigeria Ltd (1987) CLR 7(J) (SC)

Judgement delivered on September 12th 1987

Brief

  • Pleadings
  • Claims not sought but granted
  • Termination of employment
  • Need for courts not to make case for parties
  • Declaratory relief
  • Statement of claim

Facts

On the 30th day of June, 1987, after hearing the submissions of counsel for the appellant and counsel for the respondents and reading the written briefs of arguments filed by the parties together with the record of proceedings, judgments of the Court of Appeal and the High Court, i.e. the two courts below, I, in concurrence with my learned brothers dismissed this appeal and reserved my reasons for the judgment till today. I now proceed to give them.

The claim filed by the appellant as plaintiff against the respondents as defendants in the High Court of Lagos State Holden at Lagos as set out in paragraph 29 of the statement of claim reads:

"The plaintiff claims against the 1st defendant company:

  • 1
    A declaration that:
    • a
      The plaintiff is the Operations Manager of the 1st defendant company under a contract of employment;
    • b
      Any breach of the said contract of employment between the plaintiff and the 1st defendant company is illegal, invalid, ultra vires, null and void and of no effect;

      • An injunction restraining the 1st defendant company by itself, its servants and/or agents or otherwise from committing a breach of the said contract of employment existing between the plaintiff and the 1st defendant company or in any way interfering with the plaintiff in the performance of his duties as Operations Manager; ALTERNATIVELY, the plaintiff claims against the 1st defendant company N634,833.00 special and general damages for anticipatory breach of contract.

      The plaintiff/Appellant was the Operations Manager of the 1st Respondent (Texaco Nigeria Ltd.). His appointment was terminated on 1st of April 1979. He was paid three months' salary despite the fact that terms of employment stated that he was only entitled to a month's salary in lieu of a month's Notice.

      The plaintiff sued seeking a Declaration that he was still the operations manager of the Company and that any breach of the contract of employment was illegal, null and void. He also asked for an injunction to restrain the Company from Committing a breach of the said contract of employment. In the alternative, he claimed special and general damages for anticipatory breach of contract.

      But he did not claim damages for wrongful termination of employment. His statement of claim did not plead facts relating to threats he claimed he had received from the management.

      The trial Judge dismissed the plaintiffs claim for Declaration and for an order of injunction but granted the alternative claim for damages for threatened termination which the Court found to be unlawful. The Judge made no finding that the termination might be wrongful.

      The Court of appeal set aside the judgment of the High Court stating that the 1st Respondent employer terminated the plaintiffs appointment according to the conditions of the plaintiffs employment. But also stated that the finding of the trial Judge on threatened termination is legally wrong.

      The plaintiff appealed to the Supreme Court.

Issues

  • 1
    Whether or not in all the circumstances, the Court of Appeal ought to have...
Read More