Justice Dele Peters, the Presiding Judge of the Ibadan Judicial Division of the National Industrial Court, has entirely dismissed the entitlement claim brought by Mr. Olusegun Yaya, a former teacher at Olabisi Onabanjo University Primary School.
The Court emphasized the lack of proof in Mr. Yaya’s claim, stating that he failed to meet the necessary legal requirements.
Furthermore, the Court noted the absence of any cogent, credible, or admissible evidence supporting the claim during the proceedings.
Background
Mr. Olusegun Yaya, the claimant, asserted that he served Olabisi Onabanjo University Primary School for 18 years, and his employment was terminated.
He claimed that the University failed to transfer his Legacy Funds for the years 1996-2015 and did not pay his gratuity after serving for nineteen years.
In response, Olabisi Onabanjo University denied being Mr. Yaya’s employer, stating that the School Management Board is solely responsible for managing the Primary School and is the actual employer.
The University argued that it is not liable for the reliefs sought. It contended that Mr. Yaya received his terminal benefits in 2015, and there is no evidence of him contesting or protesting the sums paid.
Counsel to the University urged the Court to dismiss Mr. Yaya’s case, citing fundamental contradictions in his claims and the absence of a pre-action notice.
In opposition, Mr. Yaya’s counsel argued that the University’s defense without objecting to the Court’s jurisdiction indicates total submission.
They further urged the Court to declare the University’s law requiring a pre-action notice inconsistent with the Constitution. Mr. Yaya’s counsel claimed entitlement to N574,382 for pension deductions between 1996 and 2007 and N10,724,083.60 for remuneration shortfalls from June 2001 to May 2015.
Court’s decision
In delivering the judgment, Justice Dele Peters emphasized that the requirement for a pre-action notice does not hinder individuals’ rights to approach the Court for the protection of their constitutional rights.
The judge affirmed that there is ample evidence demonstrating that Mr. Yaya’s pre-action notice was duly served on the Vice Chancellor’s office.
Regarding the entitlement claim, the court noted that Mr. Yaya did not submit the document purportedly ending his employment with the University, and there is no evidence connecting the University to the termination of his employment.
Justice Peters outlined that Mr. Yaya needs to provide evidence on the incremental steps, shortfalls, promotions, and corresponding salary grade levels.
The court stressed the absence of cogent, credible, and admissible evidence to support Mr. Yaya’s claims, particularly questioning how he arrived at the claimed gratuity figure of N2,442,039.60, as his averments merely stated his nineteen years of service without sufficient substantiation.
The judge said “Where is the letter of promotion for which he claims financial benefits? Aside from all this, how did the Claimant arrive at the sum of N10,724,083.60? In any event, the sum claimed is a sum certain. This relief is therefore in the nature of a claim in special damages. To succeed in same the Claimant must specifically plead and strictly prove his entitlement.
“Aside from failing to specifically plead his entitlement to this relief, the Claimant also failed to strictly prove as required by law. The relief sought is not proved. Accordingly, the relief sought is not granted. It is refused and dismissed.”
