CaseLaw
Onumalobi V. NNPC (1999) CLR 11(l) (CA)
Brief
Facts
The Plaintiff's/Appellant's case in his pleadings and evidence is that his appointment was wrongfully terminated by the 2nd Respondent/Cross Appellant on 30th April, 1990 vide Exhibit 'L'. The plaintiff/Appellant's suit was filed on 21st July, 1993. Appellant contended that Exhibit 'O', letter to his solicitor from 1st Respondent, dated 27-4-93, confirmed his termination.
The Respondents/Cross-Appellant's case both in their pleadings and evidence adduced relate to a denial of wrongful termination of the appointment of the appellant. They maintain that the 2nd Respondent/Cross-Appellant is a subsidiary of the 1st Respondent. This is a fact admitted in paragraph 3 of the amended statement of claim. The appellant, in his evidence in-chief, added that the 2nd Respondent/Cross-Appellant remained under the control of the 1st Respondent/Cross-Appellant.
The appellant, under cross-examination, admitted that he was duly deployed by the 1st respondent to the 2nd Respondent vide Exhibit 'R1'.Such deployment is in accord with the 1st Respondent's condition of service, Exhibit 'T'. The appellant was under the control and supervision of the 2nd Respondent when his appointment was terminated on 20th April, 1990. The 1st Respondent, by exhibit 'U', directed the 2nd Respondent to terminate the appointment of the appellant. The 2nd Respondent complied by issuing Exhibit 'L' to terminate the appointment of the appellant. The reason given for appellant's termination of appointment was 1st Respondent's rationalisation exercise.
The Respondent/Cross-Appellants contended that as the appellant filed his suit on 21-7-93,he did not comply with s.12(1) of the Nigerian national Petroleum Corporation Act, Cap 320, laws of the Federation of Nigeria,1990 as he did not file the suit within 12 months after his appointment was terminated. The Respondents by a motion on notice had prayed the trial Court to dismiss the appellant's suit in limine on ground of statute bar but same was dismissed.
The Learned Trial Chief Judge, in his considered judgment delivered on 25-9-96, found in favour of the Plaintiff/Appellant and awarded him special damages to the tune of N54,585.30 subject to taxation. The item of claim in the sum of N1,500,000 as general damages for damage to his credit, reputation and loss of expectation was found to be 'novel'. And it was 'denied'.
Interestingly, both sides of the divide felt dis-satisfied and appealed.