5000 sacked teachers: National industrial court rules against Akwa Ibom State Government

The development signal victory for the 5,000 teachers who learned of their sacking on radio and other media of mass communication on 30 October, 2016.

It was celebration galore for the 5000 sacked teachers yesterday in court as the National Industrial Court of Nigeria, Uyo Judicial Division struck out a motion filed by Sharon Eddie(esq), Counsel to the Akwa Ibom State Government and other defendants challenging the jurisdiction of court to hear the case brought before the honourable court.
The motion by Sharon Eddie(esq) counsel to the Akwa Ibom State Government and other defendants which was purportedly filed on the 17th of February 2017 but served on other parties in open court on the 20th of February 2017 prayed the court to strike out the suit brought before the honourable court by the agreived teachers as the court lacks the jurisdiction to adjudicate on the matter on the following grounds:

1) That the Plaintiffs/Respondents lack the collective right to institute the case in a representative capacity.

2)That each of the plaintiffs/Respondents has a separate cause of action against the Defendants/Applicants.
To argue the points raised Sharon Eddie(esq) maintained that the motion is brought pursuant to Order 17, Rule 9 of the National Industrial Court of Nigeria Rules 2017.

The Counsel held that the sole feature that will prevent the court from hearing the case is that the Plaintiffs/Respondents have a personal right of action to establish as such cannot sue in representative capacity and as such not a proper party.

Citing Bemil Nigeria limited VS. Marcus Emmeribe $ ORS(2009), Sharon Eddie(esq) held that for the court to be competent and have jurisdiction over a matter, proper parties must be identified.

In other words, before an action can succeed, the parties to it must be shown to be proper parties to whom rights and obligation arising from the cause of action attach. Where the proper parties are not before the court, then the court lacks the jurisdiction to hear the suit.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *