Nigerian Ports Authority Vs Abu Airadion Ajobi (2006)

LAWGLOBAL HUB Lead Judgment Report

KUTIGI, J.S.C.

In the High Court of Justice holden at Warri, the plaintiff’s claims as endorsed on the amended writ of summons read thus: –

“(i) Declaration that the trial of plaintiff by the Disciplinary Panel/Tribunal set up by the defendant to investigate matters involving fraud and other associated criminal offences allegedly committed by the plaintiff is ultra vires the defendant, null and void.

(ii) Order setting aside the findings made by the said Disciplinary Panel Tribunal wherein the plaintiff was found guilty of committing fraud and other associated criminal offences.

(iii) An order compelling the defendant to pay to plaintiff all the entitlements including pension and gratuity forfeited by the defendant consequent upon the findings of the said tribunal/panel.

In the Alterative

(iv) An order reinstating plaintiff in the employment of the defendant authority.

(v) An order that the plaintiff’s salaries from September, 1984 until the date of judgment be paid to him by the defendant authority.”

After the filing and exchange of pleadings, the case proceeded to trial. The plaintiff gave evidence for himself he was cross-examined and closed his case. The case was then adjourned for the defence. The defendant now filed a motion on notice praying the court for an order-

“Dismissing this suit on the ground that by section 97(1) of the Ports Ordinance Cap. 155 Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 1958 and section 110(1) of the Ports Act, Laws of the Federation 1990 Cap. 361 the action is statute barred.”

The motion was supported by an affidavit and the defendant filed a counter-affidavit in opposition. The motion was argued and in a reserved ruling, the learned trial Judge concluded as follows –

“It was agreed on both sides that at the time of the purported dismissal of the respondent (meaning defendant), he was still standing trial in a criminal charge brought by the applicant (meaning defendant). Learned counsel for the respondent submitted that the respondent could not have taken out this action while the criminal case against him was still pending and that time began to run as from the date the criminal trial terminated in favour of the respondent. I agree with this submission because at the time of the purported termination of the appointment of the respondent, he was not in a position to determine whether or not the criminal case will terminate in his favour. For the foregoing reasons I hold that the application lacks merit and it is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs.”

Aggrieved by the ruling, the defendant appealed to the Court of Appeal holden at Benin City. The only issue submitted for resolution was:-

“Whether the suit of the respondent (plaintiff) was not statute barred having regard to the provisions of section 97(1) of the Ports Ordinance Act Cap. 155 Laws of the Federation of Nigeria, 1958.”