Industrial Court Dismisses Late NIMASA Director’s Entitlements Claim, Rules Benefits Fully Paid
Hon. Justice Olufunke Anuwe of the Abuja Judicial Division of the National Industrial Court has dismissed the entitlements claim instituted by Khalifa (as substitute for the late Adamu) against the Nigerian Maritime Administration and Safety Agency (NIMASA), the Minister of Transport, and the Attorney‑General of the Federation, for want of proof.
The Court found that NIMASA and the Minister of Transport had demonstrated that the late Adamu’s gratuity was duly computed based on his last salary at retirement, in line with the applicable percentage, and that arrears of his pension from October 2008 to June 2020 had been fully paid.
Justice Anuwe further held that although Adamu was a Director and Top Management Staff, he was compulsorily retired before attaining the statutory retirement age, and therefore not entitled to the additional terminal benefit of a vehicle as provided under the Conditions of Service.
The claimant, Khalifa, had argued that Adamu’s employment subsisted until July 2012, when he would have attained 35 years of service, and that he was therefore entitled to salaries, allowances, and other benefits from December 1999 (when he was retired) to July 2012. He also contended that NIMASA failed to comply with directives from the Federal Ministry of Transport, the Office of the Head of Civil Service of the Federation, the Office of the Secretary to the Government of the Federation, and the National Assembly, which had allegedly ordered Adamu’s reinstatement.
In their defence, the respondents maintained that the purported reinstatement directives were issued in error, as the matter of Adamu’s retirement had long been settled by the Ministry of Transport. By a letter dated 16 June 2004, the Minister of Transport had approved Adamu’s retirement benefits, which NIMASA promptly paid. They further argued that Adamu, having been compulsorily retired on grounds of misconduct, was not entitled to additional benefits.
The defendants also challenged the competence of the suit, contending that the cause of action was personal to the deceased claimant and could not survive him. They urged the court to strike out the matter.
In a considered judgment, Justice Anuwe held that the reliefs sought related to post‑retirement entitlements, which survive the deceased and could properly be pursued by his next‑of‑kin. The substitution was therefore valid. However, the Court reasoned that since Adamu never challenged the legality of his compulsory retirement, he could not now be deemed to have sought to void it.
Finally, Justice Anuwe clarified that the NIMASA Act does not subject the agency’s employment decisions to the directives of the Ministry of Transport, the Head of Service, the SGF, or the National Assembly, thereby rejecting the claimant’s reliance on such directives.
