Mohammed Yakubu had been a dedicated employee of Transcorp Hilton for a decade, pouring his time and efforts into his work. However, his life took an unexpected turn on that fateful day, February 10, 2015.
As he entered his department, he noticed the presence of the General Manager at the time, Mr. Etienne Gailliez, and his boss, Mr. Paul Agiopu, the Head of the Housekeeping Department. To his surprise, they called him by a different name, Khalid, instead of his usual nickname, APC, which was given to him due to his support for the ruling All Progressives Congress (APC)`.
Mr. Yakubu playfully inquired about the change, wondering why they had decided to call him by his actual name.
The General Manager responded by informing him that the hotel was aligned with the PDP party, insinuating that if he wanted job security, he should seek the favour of the APC and President Buhari.
At first, Mr. Yakubu perceived it as a light-hearted jest, not thinking much of the comment. However, his world came crashing down when the Director of Human Resources, Ms. Omorinsola Sofola, summoned him shortly afterward.
With a grave expression, she handed him a termination letter, abruptly ending his employment. Confused and taken aback, Mr. Yakubu asked about the reason behind this sudden decision. He explained his previous interaction with the General Manager, hoping for some clarity.
Regrettably, Ms. Sofola seemed uninterested in his explanation. Without providing any prior notice or compensation in lieu of notice, she reluctantly handed him the letter that would forever alter his life. Stunned, Mr. Yakubu realised that his loyalty to the APC had cost him his job.
To his dismay, as he left the premises, he was accompanied by the Chief Security Officer who told him to ensure that he would never set foot near Transcorp Hilton again.
This unjust treatment and the abrupt termination of his employment prompted Mr. Yakubu to take legal action against the defendants, filing a suit to seek justice and rectify the blatant unfairness he had endured.
In Nigeria, the termination of an employee contract is guided by some provisions of law.However, many employers do not adhere to these provisions before terminating the employment of their staff.
While private employment in Nigeria is regulated by the terms of the employment contract and the guidelines of international labour standards, government employees are regulated by relevant Public Service Rules.
Article 4 of the International Labour Organisation’s (ILO) Termination of Employment Convention 1982 (No. 158) (‘the Convention’) stipulates that;
“The employment of a worker can only be terminated for ‘valid reason’ connected with the capacity of the worker; the conduct of the worker; or based on the operational requirements of the employer
Mohammed Khalid Yakubu vs Transcorp Hilton
The judgement was delivered by the president of the National Industrial court on November 22, 2022 in the suit marked: NICN/ABJ/273/2018.
Mr Yakubu had approached the court on October 22, 2018 seeking a declaration of the court that the termination of his employment without notice was unlawful.
The defendants include ;Transcorp Hilton Abuja,Mr Etienne Galilee and Transcorp Hotels Plc
The claimant is seeking several reliefs from the defendants.
These include a declaration that the termination of the claimant’s employment without notice or payment in lieu of notice is unlawful.
A declaration that the claimant is still employed by the defendants. The claimant is also seeking various financial compensations, such as monthly salary increases, relief packages, bonuses, service charges, feeding allowance, leave allowance, long service award, and monthly allowances.
Additionally, the claimant wants the defendants to pay the outstanding pension contributions and convert the termination to retirement, granting retirement benefits.
The claimant is also seeking general damages, litigation costs, and interest on the granted sums. Lastly, the claimant wants the defendants to provide a yearly hamper or a monetary alternative.
Defendants` response
The 1st defendant (Transcorp Hilton Abuja) did not file any defence to the claimant’s suit, the 2nd and 3rd defendants did, which defence processes were later amended pursuant to the order of this Court.
The defendants asked the court to strike out the 1st and the 2nd defendants from the suit on the ground that the 1st defendant is not a legal personality capable of suing or being sued, and the 2nd defendant is an agent of a disclosed principal.
The 2nd and 3rd defendants submitted a sole issue for determination which is “Whether the claimant is entitled to the reliefs being sought, having regard to the evidence before the Court.
They averred that the political parties such as APC and PDP, which the claimant asserted were elements intended to generate unwarranted sentiment which should be disregarded by the Court.
The 2nd and 3rd defendants prayed the Court to discountenance the claimant’s story regarding his termination.
Regarding the termination of Mr Yakubu’s employment they said “the termination of the claimant’s employment is lawful and within the provisions of Article 1(G)(i) of Exhibit D5 (that is, the 3rd defendant’s Transcorp Hilton’s Junior Staff Conditions of Service) which allows either of the contracting party, especially in the case of a confirmed employee, to terminate the contract of employment by giving the other party one month notice or one month basic salary in lieu of notice.
Read Also : NPA retiree bags 14 years imprisonment for N24.3m fraud
Court decision
After listening to submissions and arguements from parties in the suit, the president of the National Industrial Court, Justice Benedict Kanyip, said the claimant’s case failed.
He said “Since the termination of the employment of the claimant was at the behest of the defendants, it cannot be held against the claimant that he did not spend 10 years.
“The 9 years, 4 months and 10 days he spend must accordingly be approximated to 10 years based on the law of arithmetical approximation. I so rule. I hold, therefore, that the claimant spent 10 years in the service of the defendants.
The judge asked “Despite this holding, is the claimant still entitled to “US$430,000 and a gift worth N45,000” that he claims?
He said “ I indicated earlier that special damages must be strictly proved. This the claimant has not done; and so even this claim in terms of relief 3((vii) must fail as the claimant did not tell this Court how he came by the quantum of the sums claimed. Relief 3(vii) accordingly fails and so is hereby dismissed.
“Relief (7) is for an order of the Court compelling the defendants to pay to the claimant cost of this litigation in the sum of N5,000,000 (Five Million Naira) only. The claimant’s case, as already shown, failed. he cannot be entitled to any cost. Relief (7) accordingly fails and is hereby dismissed.
“ Relief (8) is for an order of the Court that all the sum to be granted to the claimant under the judgement to be delivered in this case by the court shall be paid with 15% (percent) interest per month until final liquidation. This relief too fails since there is no sum awarded to the claimant. it is accordingly dismissed.
“On the whole, the claimant’s case fails and is hereby dismissed. I make no other order.”
