By Desire Emmanuel
A woman who dragged the Oyo State Water Corporation to court for suspending her for over 12 years without pay following allegations of misconduct has had her case thrown out because it was ‘statute-barred.’
Justice Yakubu Hassan of the Ibadan Division of the National Industrial Court dismissed the suit filed by the woman, Mrs Oluyemisi Asunmo, against the organisation for being statute-barred and for want of jurisdiction.
The judge held that Oluyemisi failed to institute her action within the period prescribed by the Limitation Law of Oyo State and consequently lost the right to enforce her claims before the court.
According to available documents, the woman told the court that she was employed by the Water Corporation in 1977, her employment was confirmed in 1979 and she rose through the ranks to become a Senior Officer before her suspension in August 2000 following allegations of misconduct.
She added that she was charged before the High Court of Oyo State and was discharged and acquitted. While the appeal filed against her acquittal was later dismissed, the corporation failed to recall her from suspension or pay her entitlements until she attained retirement age in 2012.
Therefore, Oluyemisi sought several declaratory and monetary reliefs, including a declaration that her suspension without pay for over 12 years was unlawful, payment of accumulated salaries and allowances, gratuity, pension arrears, leave allowances, lifetime pension, interest on judgment sum and general and exemplary damages totalling over N17 million.
Water Corporation of Oyo State, in its defence, told the court that Oluyemisi was never dismissed from service but absconded from duty and failed to honour several official invitations and communications issued to her.
The corporation further argued that Oluyemisi’s suit was statute-barred as it was filed several years after the cause of action arose and urged the court to dismiss the case in its entirety.
Counsel to Oluyemisi however posited that the Water Corporation took his client and others to court, that the court delivered a ruling in 2014, and that the corporation went further to appeal that judgment.
Consequently, the counsel contended that it shows that the Statute of Limitation cannot fly, and urged the court to discountenance the plea of the Statute in the interest of justice.
Delivering judgment, Justice Hassan held that limitation of action is a jurisdictional issue that can be raised at any stage of proceedings and need not be specifically pleaded before it can be relied upon.
He also said that the suspension of Oluyemisi in August 2000 did not terminate her employment and therefore did not constitute the date when the cause of action arose.
The judge added that the cause of action arose in 2012 when Oluyemisi attained retirement age while still on suspension and she ought to have sought legal redress immediately after her retirement, adding that Oluyemisi’s institution of action in October 2017 was outside the five-year limitation period prescribed by the Limitation Law of Oyo State.
Justice Hassan noted that the argument of her counsel that the criminal prosecution of his client has postponed the accrual of cause of action till after the determination of the appeal does not reflect the true position of the law.
He therefore held that the pendency of criminal proceedings did not prevent Mrs. Oluyemisi Asunmo from instituting a civil action since civil and criminal proceedings may run concurrently.
The judge dismissed the entire suit and ordered that each party shall bear their own costs.
