1st July, 2017
Some Lagos lawyers on Saturday reacted differently to the recent judgment of the Supreme Court which vested jurisdiction in the Court of Appeal on appeals from the National Industrial Court of Nigeria (NICN).
The lawyers described the decision as a welcome development, but cautioned that there was need to check what they called potential arbitrariness by the finality of NICN’s decisions.
The Court of Appeal in Lagos had in 2014 referred to the Supreme Court an appeal in the case of Mainstreet Bank Ltd vs Victor Anaemen Iwu.
The case was consolidated with a related appeal in the case of Coca-Cola Nig. Ltd vs Titilayo Akinsanya, in which the Court had in 2013 held that there was no right of appeal against the decision of the NICN, except as limited in Section 243(2)-(4) of the 1999 Constitution.
The appellate court had referred the appeal to the Supreme Court, seeking a resolution of the substantial question of law on the finality of its decisions.
The issue of finality of the decisions of the industrial court had generated a lot of controversy in the legal profession among litigants, employees, employers of labour and the academia with several appeals awaiting the outcome of the decision of the Apex Court on the vexed issue.
In its judgment on June 30, a full panel of Justices of the Supreme Court, presided by Justice Mary Peter-Odili, held that there was no constitutional provision divesting the Court of Appeal of jurisdiction to hear appeals emanating from the NICN.
The apex court also held that the right of appeal was not limited to fundamental rights cases.
Mr Mike Dugeri described the judgment as “laying to rest” all pre-existing confusions in relation to court’s jurisdiction.
He, however, stressed the need for a balance in the application of the law so as to check arbitrariness.
“I have mixed feelings about this decision; on one hand, there is the need to check potential arbitrariness by the finality of NICN’s decisions, while on the other hand, there is the need to ensure a speedy resolution of labour disputes.
“I say this due to the peculiar nature of cases touching on worker-employee relationship.
“While tackling the perceived arbitrariness of the NICN, the Supreme Court may have unwittingly given lawyers a tool with which to stay or prolong labour disputes.
“There remains, in my humble view, the need to strike a balance in a manner that works best for our nascent labour law jurisprudence so as to avoid abuse, ” said the social critic.
A constitutional lawyer, Mr Aruta Ogah, who described the judgement as a welcome development, said it was long overdue.
According to him, there appears to be a dissenting judgment on the issue, the decision of the apex court remains final and has resolved a plethora of unanswered questions in the nation’s legal system.
He said:“This is a welcomed development in our legal system; although, there is a dissenting judgment on the issue, I believe this Supreme Court’s decision has helped to resolve every question posed on the finality of NICN’s decisions.”
In the same vein, a human rights activist, Mr Justice Chimezie, hailed the apex court’s decision, saying the coast is now clear for litigants to do the needful in respect of appeals.
Chimezie, however, expressed concern that such decisions could also lead to an abuse of court process by some litigants and lawyers, who might employ same to frustrate the justice system.