Hon. Justice Nelson Ogbuanya of the Portharcourt Judicial division of the National Industrial Court has quashed the purported dismissal of one Mr. Ganiyu Rasak on 31st March 2020 from Liquid Ltd for being wrongful and consequently commuted same to Termination.

The court held that the summary dismissal of Mr. Ganiyu was grossly tainted, having not been issued in compliance with the terms of the parties’ employment contract, and carried out in respect of absence from duty at a time the Government authorities imposed lockdown as a measure to curtail the widespread of covid-19 pandemic for the good of public health and safety.

Justice Ogbuanya held that the act of the firm punishing Mr. Ganiyu with summary dismissal in such circumstance amount to flagrant disregard of public safety, health, and welfare of labour and also constitute unfair labour practice, which the court is poised to curtail.

The Court further ordered the firm to pay to Mr. Ganiyu’s salary in lieu of notice, in the sum of N350, 000.00, his entitlement to the contributory pensions standing to the tune of N907, 200.00, as at March 31, 2020, through his Pension Fund Administrator (PFA), N1,000,000.00 (One Million Naira) as damages for the wrongful dismissal, and unfair labour practice and the sum of N100,000.00 (One Hundred Thousand Naira) cost of action within one month.

From facts, the claimant- Mr. Ganiyu had submitted that by a letter dated 27th March 2020 he wrote a formal Request for Absence following an oral request to be off duty to enable him to travel to Lagos and re-join his family so as not to be caught up with the lockdown order issued by Government as a response measure to curb the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic.

He testified that by an email dated March 28 2020 the management refused his application with a notification directive that he would be summarily dismissed if he did not report back to his duty post on Tuesday 31st March 2020 which he pleaded for understanding but all to no avail.

In defense, the firm maintained that Mr. Ganiyu’s conduct amounts to willful disobedience, continuous absenteeism from work without leave, and negligence of duty, which were classified as gross misconduct and punishment of summary dismissal is in line with the Employee Handbook, that the claimant’s purported entitlement to contributory pension funds ended with his summary dismissal from the employment, urged the court to dismiss the suit as lacking in merit.

In reply, the Ganiyu’s counsel, Babatunde Opadola, Esq averred that the letter of dismissal violated the provisions of the company’s Employee Handbook and the client did not commit any offence of Job Abandonment, urged the court to grant the reliefs sought.

Delivering the judgment, the presiding Judge, Justice Nelson Ogbuanya held that in any kind of employment regime, the best practice is that dismissal must be for justifiable reason and due observance of extant contract of service and fair hearing.

Justice Ogbunaya continued that the firm was not unaware of the movement of Mr. Ganiyu that the concept of ‘job abandonment at workplace’, is that the employer does not know the whereabouts of the employee who left the duty post or fails to report for duty without contact with the employee to provide reason for such behaviour.

Justice Ogbuanya expressed that the firm seems not to look at the side of the urgency painted by the Claimant regarding the impending Covid-19 lockdown that would keep the Claimant away from his family as the measure would affect both Port Harcourt and Lagos.

“I find also, that the Defendant defiled its own set-out grace period for the Claimant to resume work on 31st March 2020, as it did not allow the day to exhaust or show proof that the Claimant did not resume work at the close of attendance period on the said deadline day.

“Even the guiding corpus of legal interpretation – the Interpretation Act, recognizes that a deadline day is taken cognizance of in determining non-compliance with an act which is directed to be done in a stipulated period. Having not waited for the exhaustion of the last day of the grace period given to the Claimant to resume, invariably impacted negatively on the act of summary dismissal by the Defendant. I so hold.”