National Industrial Court Declares UBA Dismissal of Employee Illegal
The National Industrial Court sitting in Lagos has declared the dismissal of former United Bank for Africa (UBA) employee, Mr. Lawal, unlawful, null, and void.
Delivering judgment, Justice Rabi Gwandu held that UBA failed to comply with its own disciplinary procedures and did not afford Mr. Lawal a fair hearing before terminating his employment. The court emphasized that allegations amounting to criminal conduct must first be proven before disciplinary action can be taken.
The court ordered the bank to calculate and pay Mr Lawal all entitlements he would have received if his employment had been lawfully terminated, including salaries from November 2014 to March 2015, salaries from April 2015 until the date of judgment at the applicable monthly rate, as well as his gratuity and pension benefits.
The case followed a complaint received by UBA from a customer over the alleged disappearance of funds from an account. The bank subsequently suspended Mr Lawal while conducting an investigation and later dismissed him after concluding its internal disciplinary process.
Mr Lawal had challenged the dismissal, arguing that UBA violated its Group Human Resources Disciplinary Process and Sanctions Policy, which governed the employment relationship between both parties. He maintained that the bank terminated his employment without following the required disciplinary procedure.
In its defence, UBA argued that Mr Lawal was informed of the allegations against him, appeared before its disciplinary process, exercised his right of appeal, and was therefore given a fair hearing before the dismissal.
However, counsel to Mr Lawal, Adewale Bolaji Esq., argued that an employer cannot dismiss an employee based on false, faulty, or unsubstantiated allegations, particularly where the allegations amount to criminal accusations.
He told the court that the Nigeria Police had investigated the matter and cleared his client of wrongdoing, but UBA ignored the police report and proceeded with the dismissal despite the findings.
In her judgment, Justice Gwandu held that where an employee is dismissed based on an allegation of crime, the allegation must first be proven, and the employee must be given adequate opportunity to defend himself before any disciplinary action is taken.
The judge ruled that UBA failed to establish that Mr Lawal’s dismissal was carried out in accordance with his employment contract, its internal disciplinary policy, and the principles of natural justice.
Justice Gwandu also noted that the bank ignored the police investigation report, which exonerated Mr Lawal and pointed to another individual in connection with the allegation.
The court stated that UBA failed to justify the dismissal because it could not prove that the disciplinary process complied with its human resources policy or that Mr Lawal was afforded a fair hearing.
Justice Gwandu further held that when an individual has been investigated and cleared of a serious allegation, justice requires that the person’s name should be cleared of the damage caused by such accusations.
The court criticized the bank’s decision to dismiss Mr Lawal simply because his name was mentioned in a complaint, especially when the complaint was reportedly abandoned by the complainant without proper verification.
The judgment reinforces the requirement that employers must follow fair procedures and respect employees’ rights before terminating employment, particularly in cases involving allegations of criminal conduct.
