Hon. Justice Anthonia Ubaka of the Lagos Judicial Division of the National Industrial Court has declared the termination of one Oladunni’s employment as contained in the OANDO PLC letter dated 26th June 2014 as wrongful.
The Court ordered OANDO PLC to pay Oladunni three (3) months’ salary in lieu of notice in the sum of N1, 205, 186. 41, the sum of N2,772,701.47 being Gratuity / End of service payment and the sum of N500,000 cost of action within 30 days.
From facts, the claimant- Oladunni had submitted that while awaiting the HR feedback following her return from Study leave, she proactively held meetings with some Executives of the Group Office and some Subsidiaries as advised by the Group HR for possible consideration and that it was in the course of her awaiting HR reabsorption that she was served the wrongful termination letter.
Oladunni stated that she did not at any time act in breach of the terms expressed or implied in her employment with OANDO, and her purported termination was wrongful, and that she was treated unjustly and not given an option to resign honourably from the company after 10years of meritorious service.
In defence, the defendant- OANDO PLC averred that Oladunni failed to return to the office upon the expiration of her approved l-year study leave, neither did she request for an extension of same but merely expressed her desire for re-absorption with the intention of combining her job with her studies, which is contrary to the company’s operational model and would not have been approved, assuming the Claimant Officially applied to do so.
OANDO PLC stressed that the company was not obliged to give Oladunni a 3 months’ notice of termination of employment as the requirement did not apply to Oladunni whose name had been suspended from the Company’s payroll and database effective from when her study leave commenced and that the employment of Oladunni was not wrongfully terminated as claimed, but rather terminated in line with the provisions of the Staff Handbook.
In opposition, the Oladunni’s counsel, Opeyokun Esq stated that Oladunni returned to the company after the expiration of the thirteen (13) months leave and she did not in any way violate the provisions of the OANDO’s staff Handbook guiding her employment as there was no need to request for an extension as she was technically done with her studies but for the ASUU strike which delayed the defending of her project, and urged the Court to grant the reliefs sought.
In a well-considered judgment, the Presiding Judge, Justice Anthonia Ubaka, agreed with Oladunni’s counsel that the OANDO PLC was in breach of the expressed terms of the contract when it failed to issue Oladunni with notice and yet failed to make a payment in lieu of the said notice as at the date when the relationship was severed.
The Court held that by the OANDO’s handbook, reabsorption after study leave is not automatic, and Oladunni failed to write for an extension when she could not complete her studies.
“I hereby hold that the defendant is to pay the claimant 3 months’ salary in lieu of notice of the said termination in the sum of N1, 205, 186. 41 being calculation as per annexure 2 attached to exhibit FO26 and the claimant’s calculation in paragraph 18 of the statement of fact.” The Court ruled.
