ILO Convention: Evidence of Ratification not Required – Industrial Court tells Cadbury Nigeria
Hon. Justice Gerald Nweneka of the Lagos Judicial Division of the National Industrial Court has declared the termination of one Mr Paul’s employment by Cadbury Nigeria Plc without stating any valid or justifiable reason, or any reason at all as wrongful and in breach of the ILO Convention.
The Court ordered Cadbury Nigeria Plc to pay Mr Paul the sum of N1,000,000.00 [One Million Naira] general damages for unfair disengagement, N500,000 cost of action which shall attract interest at the rate of 10% per annum from today until it is fully liquidated.
Justice Nweneka held that notwithstanding the stipulations in the employment contract, and regardless of the character of the employment, whether statutory or contractual, modern labour jurisprudence postulates that an employer cannot terminate the employment of an employee without a valid reason connected with the employee’s capacity or conduct or based on the employer’s operational requirements.
From facts, the claimant- Mr. Paul had submitted that his employment was confirmed on 23rd October 1998, and he was a high performer which earned him promotions, he was promoted to Grade 9 on 10th October 2014, that by a letter dated 27th February 2018, the company terminated his employment for services no longer required, but did not immediately pay his terminal benefits.
In defence, the defendant- Cadbury Nigeria Plc argued that it complied with Mr. Paul’s employment contract and that an employer can terminate the employee’s employment based on poor performance with or without warning.
The learned counsel to Cadbury Nigeria Plc maintained that having actively participated in the process leading to the payment of his terminal benefits and accepted the benefits, Mr. Paul is estopped from making any claims against the Defendant rendering the suit liable to be dismissed.
Learned counsel submitted that Mr Paul’s reliance on the ILO Convention cannot avail him since Nigeria has not ratified the Convention and Mr Paul has not complied with the Rule of the Court requiring pleading and proof of ratification of the Convention and urged the court to dismiss the case in its entirety.
In opposition, the learned counsel to Mr. Paul averred that given the events preceding his client’s sack, such as rating him below expectation, denying him the necessary work tools, failure to address his complaints by due process, the termination of Mr. Paul’s employment was an act of victimization.
Learned counsel further argued that despite the allegation of poor performance, his client was not served any query or warning letter, and urged the Court to grant the reliefs sought.
In a well-considered judgment, the presiding Judge, Justice Gerald Nweneka held that the evidence before the court supports Mr. Paul’s evidence that his employment was terminated because he challenged the 2017 year-end appraisal score.
Justice Nweneka held that Cadbury Nigeria Plc has not discharged the evidential burden that Mr Paul’s performance in all his roles before his appointment termination was progressively abysmal and that his employment was terminated for poor performance.
The Court stated that the jurisdiction of the Court has been expanded to include causes and matters relating to or connected with unfair labour practices or international best practices in labour, employment and industrial relations matters; and to the application or interpretation of international labour standards, therefore, evidence of ratification is no longer required before this Court can apply it.
“Therefore, in so far as Order 14A of the Rules has the force of law, it cannot override the provisions of the 1999 Constitution. There is no requirement of pleading or proof of ratification in Section 254C[1][f] and [h] of the 1999 Constitution.” The Court ruled.
