Disable Preloader

CaseLaw

Nigeria Union of Teachers Taraba State V. Habu (2018) CLR 3(v) (SC)

Judgement delivered on 23rd of March, 2018

Brief

  • Appeal as of Right
  • Breach of Right to fair hearing
  • Hearing notice
  • Preliminary objection
  • Amended pleadings and process
  • Section 34 of the 1999 Constitution
  • Section 35 of the 1999 Constitution
  • Section 40 of the 1999 Constitution
  • Section 233(2)(c) of 1999 Constitution
  • Section 36(1) of the 1999 Constitution
  • Order 6 Rule 9(5) of the Court of Appeal Rules, 2002
  • Order 2 Rule 9(1) of the Supreme Court Rules
  • Article 2 of the African Charter on Human Rights (Ratification and Enforcement) Act 1990
  • Article 5 of the African Charter on Human Rights (Ratification and Enforcement) Act 1990
  • Article 6 of the African Charter on Human Rights (Ratification and Enforcement) Act 1990
  • Article 10 of the African Charter on Human Rights (Ratification and Enforcement) Act 1990
  • Article 11 of the African Charter on Human Rights (Ratification and Enforcement) Act 1990

Facts

The Respondents were the applicants at the Taraba State High Court, suing for themselves and on behalf of the Academic Staff of Secondary Schools in Taraba State. The Respondents initiated this action at the trial High Court against the Appellants for the enforcement of their fundamental rights guaranteed by Sections 34, 35 and 40 of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (the 1999 Constitution) and Articles 2, 5, 6, 10 & 11 of the African Charter on Human Rights (Ratification and Enforcement) Act, Cap 10 LFN 1990. The substance of their suit, brought under the Fundamental Right (Enforcement Procedure) Rules, is that, having withdrawn their membership of and resigned from the Nigerian Union of Teachers (NUT) (the 1st Appellant); their employers, the Taraba State Teaching Service Board (2nd Appellant), was obligated to respect their decision and stop deducting "check off dues and Teachers Welfare Premium" from their salaries and paying over the same to NUT. They insist that such monies cannot be forcefully deducted from their salaries and paid to a rival union on their behalf. The Respondents maintain that they have migrated from NUT to another Union called the Conference of Secondary School Tutors (COSST).

The trial High Court (Agya, J.) in its ruling delivered on 4th November, 2003, upon the preliminary objection of the 1st and 6th Respondents in the application, struck out the suit on the ground that it had no jurisdiction to entertain and determine the matter. On appeal by the Respondents herein, the applicants, the Court of Appeal (the Lower Court), upon allowing the appeal, set aside the decision of the trial Court. It further ordered that the suit be heard de novo. This further appeal is at the instance of the aggrieved Appellants, who were the respondents at both the trial Court and the Lower Court.

Issues

  • 1.
    Whether the Court of Appeal was right when it held that the Taraba State...
    Read More