In a highly anticipated development, the National Industrial Court has scheduled May 30 as the date for delivering judgment in the lawsuit brought by the Federal Government against the Academic Staff Union of Universities (ASUU). This legal battle stems from the substantive suit filed during ASUU’s eight-month strike in 2022.
During the proceedings before Justice Benedict Kanyip on Thursday, the counsel for the claimants, Senator Ita Enang, informed the court that the session was designated for the adoption of written addresses. However, Mr. Femi Falana, SAN, the defendant’s counsel, revealed that he had lodged a notice of appeal with the Court of Appeal. Falana contested the ruling issued by the court on March 28, which upheld the Minister of Labour and Employment’s authority to refer the matter to the National Industrial Court.
Seeking a stay of execution, Falana requested an adjournment until the Court of Appeal reached a decision. He also argued that the competence of the appeal should be determined by the Court of Appeal, as contended by Enang. In contrast, Enang urged the court to proceed with the day’s agenda, which was the adoption of written addresses.
The court, emphasizing the importance of timely justice delivery, stated, “It is better to get a bad judgment quickly than a good judgment in delayed time in labor matters.” Additionally, the court ruled that the authorities cited by the defense counsel were not applicable to the present case. Referring to Rule 47 of NICN 2006 proceedings, the court clarified that an appeal did not automatically result in a stay of execution.
Furthermore, the judge expressed dissatisfaction with the defense’s lack of seriousness, as they failed to file their defense and instead chose to file an application for a stay of execution. The court noted that the progress of the case had been hindered by various applications.
Judge Kanyip firmly stated, “The application for stay of execution is rejected, and the case will proceed, and ruling is entered accordingly.” Consequently, the claimant’s counsel was directed to proceed with the adoption of his written address.
In response, the counsel urged the court to grant all the reliefs sought, emphasizing that the defense did not challenge or contest the suit through its failure to file defense processes. Falana, in his remarks, requested the court to consider the record, including his earlier affidavit filed on September 16, 2022, asserting that the unchallenged affidavit encapsulated his defense.
The court subsequently adjourned the matter until May 30 for the judgment.
In a related case, where ASUU serves as the claimant, the court also adjourned proceedings until June 21. ASUU seeks a court order compelling the Minister of Labour and Employment to accept its annual financial report. The adjournment was necessitated by the third defendant’s counsel, Mr. Alex Akoja, who informed the court of his recent involvement in the matter. Akoja requested an adjournment to allow him sufficient time to file the necessary processes.
Additionally, the third lawsuit involving the same parties was also adjourned until June 21 for a report of settlement or hearing.
During the earlier stages of the proceedings, Falana had submitted a motion requesting the case to be transferred to the Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) Centre of the court. Enang, however, contested the referral, citing ASUU’s admission of failure to file its annual financial returns within the stipulated timeframe. Enang also withdrew his preliminary objection, which was premised on the court lacking jurisdiction.
Granting Falana the opportunity to argue his application for the case to be referred to ADR, the court subsequently adjourned the matter until
Comments are closed.