The Presiding Judge, Calabar Judicial division of the National Industrial Court, Hon. Justice Sanusi Kado has dismissed one Adedayo alleged unlawful dismissal claim against Stanbic IBTC Bank in its entirety for lacking merit.
The court held that Adedayo’s decision not to honour the invitation to appear before disciplinary enquiry goes to show that he (Adedayo) has no answers to the accusations contained in the letter of invitation and cannot be heard to be complaining of lack of fair hearing.
Justice Kado held further that no law prohibits an employer from taking disciplinary action against its employee notwithstanding that the employee is standing trial for a criminal offence.
From facts, the claimant- Mr. Adedayo had submitted that his employment with the bank was illegally terminated on an allegation of misconduct which he vehemently denied. He stated that during his 10 years’ service with the bank he was never queried or suspended for any offence or misconduct.
In defense, the defendant- Stanbic Bank submitted that Adedayo failed to honour the invitation to explain his role regarding allegations of the misconduct leveled against him and his solicitors emphatically informed the firm that Adedayo will not honour the invitation even after being given another opportunity to appear before the committee on the premise that Adedayo was facing charge at the magistrate court.
Defendant’s counsel, Kehinde Aina, Esq submitted that Adedayo has not led cogent evidence before the Court to entitle him to the grant of the reliefs sought, urged the court to dismiss the case.
In opposition, the learned counsel, Lawrence Alabi, Esq submitted that a court of competent jurisdiction did not indict Adedayo and as such his dismissal by the bank based on the same allegation is wrongful, unwarranted, and mischievous; urged the court to so hold.
Delivering the judgment after careful evaluation of the submissions of both parties, the presiding Judge, Justice Sanusi Kado held that Adedayo and his counsel were wrong to insist on first facing criminal trial before appearing before a disciplinary that the employer cannot be made to wait until the employee is dealt with in a criminal trial.
Justice Kado said Adedayo has not shown that the date he was to appear before the defendant’s disciplinary Committee coincides with the dates of his attending to his criminal trial that counsel’s advice cannot serve as the position of the law, it remained advice until sanctioned by law or affirmed by decision of the court.
