Breach of Duty: Court Dismisses Ex-Employee’s N100m Claim against NBCCourtBreach of Duty: Court Dismisses Ex-Employee’s N100m Claim against NBC

Wale Igbintade

The National Industrial Court sitting in Lagos has refused the N100 million claim demanded by a former staff of the Nigerian Bottling Company limited (NBC), Mr. Abifarin Oluwadamilola Elijah, over alleged injury sustained while working for the company.

Justice Elizabeth A. Oji, in her judgement held that the claimant failed to prove by evidence that the Defendant (NBC) directly or indirectly caused his health condition by lack of its duty of care.

On whether the claimant was entitled to the reliefs sought, the court held that the claimant failed to prove most of the expenses he allegedly spent on treatment except for the sum of N80, 750.00 as proved.

Consequently, the court ordered the defendant to pay the claimant the sum of N80, 750 only.

The claimant had in a suit marked NICN/LA/329/2020, filed by his lawyer, stated that he was employed by the defendant on June 13, 2018, as a Syrup Process Technician at the Ikeja Plant.

The claimant in his statement of claim stated that during a night shift at the defendant’s Ikeja Plant B, he was ordered and forced by one Mr. Akin (a shift leader) to leave his department and join another department for a rework of Pulpy orange (85cl), which involved lifting the heavy packs of juice, specifically three pallets of 5 Alive 85cl Pulpy Orange juice.

While the claimant was working, the claimant collapsed due to a sharp back pain as a result of backbone (spine) damage caused by carrying heavy loads.

On May 7, 2020, precisely at about 4:00am, the claimant visited the defendant’s clinic as a result of the injury and was given treatment and medication.

The claimant stated further that he visited Subol Hospital and he was placed on a total of 14-day sick leave. Subsequently, the claimant was directed to the same Subol Hospital Ltd, wherein series of tests and x-rays were conducted, and the report dated May 8, 2020, addressed to the defendant, stating the present conditions and incapability the claimant was subjected to as a result of the injury developed in the course of his employment.

Upon further consultation with Holy Trinity Hospital, it was advised that the claimant should avoid sitting, standing and walking for long and any other activities that may complicate his medical condition.

Subsequently, the defendant instructed the Holy Trinity Hospital and Subol Hospital to stop the medical treatment and the claimant was informed that he was no longer covered under the hospital policy.

The claimant then resorted to using his personal funds for his medical treatment and was supported by family and friends when his conditions began to reverse to worst, leading to more weakness in his limbs and numbness of the legs.

The claimant added that he sought independent assessment for medical treatment abroad, particularly in Dubai, U.A.E. and Turkey and furnished the hospital with all the medical reports received from all hospitals and laboratories.

Two neurosurgeons were recommended, one in Dubai, U.A.E and one in Turkey with the estimated cost for such operation or medical treatment.

Consequently, the claimant sought for the following reliefs: “An order directing the defendant to pay to the claimant the sum of N620,480.50 being reimbursement for all expenses spent by the claimant for his medical treatment.

“An order directing the defendant to pay to the claimant the cost of treatment for the surgery to be carried out on the claimant by a Neurosurgeon in Dubai, United Arab Emirate of a minimum of $7,500.

“An order directing the defendant to pay to the claimant the sum of $48,455 being the estimated cost required to fly the claimant from Nigeria to Dubai, accommodate him there and perform other ancillary services and treatment.”

But, contesting the claims the defendant stated that reworking does not require any particular skill set and as such, and that there was no specific department for reworking duties in the defendant’s employment.

It added that the Claimant was assigned two pallets (containing 150 cases of juice each) and the claimant sorted 105 cases out of the first pallet before disappearing without any explanation, excuse, permission or notification to his colleagues, supervisors or line managers.

The Defendant maintained that the allegation that the claimant collapsed was untrue as not even one of his colleagues with whom he was carrying out the reworking exercise saw him collapsing and out of a total number of about 20 workers who participated in the reworking exercise, only the claimant who did not complete his own task complained of discomfort as a result of the exercise.

In her judgement, Justice Orji held: “The claimant’s evidence did not establish that the job function he was at the point of the alleged injury was not a manufacturing function.

“Further, the account of the claimant on how he came about the injury is inconsistent. As a result of the inconsistency, the claimant has not established to this court that he collapsed, and at what time he collapsed.”

“The claimant did not prove that he was assigned what he was not contractually employed to do, or that any accident or incident occurred to him, while performing the said function.

“The claimant has not established that thing the defendant was expected to do, which it failed to do.  Therefore, I find that it is not proved by evidence that the defendant directly or indirectly caused the health condition of the claimant, by lack of its duty of care.  I so hold.”