For unlawfully detaining and assaulting her, a former employee of the Uniliver Nigeria Plc, Mrs Grace Okafor has dragged the firm and one of its workers, Mr. Segun Oguntoyinbo before a Lagos High Court, Igbosere. Trial judge, Kazeem Alogba has fixed February 25 for hearing of the suit.
The claimant is asking the court to declare that her unlawful detention on February 16, 2017, within the premises of the 1st defendant is a breach of claimant her fundamental right to personal liberty guaranteed under 1999 constitution of Federal Republic of Nigeria as amended.
The claimant is asking the court to declare that her unlawful detention on February 16, 2017, within the premises of the 1st defendant is a breach of claimant her fundamental right to personal liberty guaranteed under 1999 constitution of Federal Republic of Nigeria as amended.
She is also seeking for an order that the defendant is vicariously liable for the unlawful and unjustifiable interference with her person by the 2nd defendant who committed the said act in the course of his duties with the 1st defendant.
In her statement of claim, she stated: ”following the report by the claimant, supplier was blacklisted in a bid to vent his anger and frustration for the rejection of the bribe offered and consequent blacklisting the said supplier instituted an action against the 1st defendant whereupon judgment was delivered in her favour of the 1st defendant.
“In what appeared to be disapproval for the role played by the claimant in the blacklisting of the supplier and the attendant consequence, the claimant colleagues started bullying the claimant unjustifiable and relations she had prior that time enjoyevnst them. The defendants averred that there was never a time the claimant was bullied or harassed by any of the employees or staff of the 1st defendant.
“At no time did 2nd defendant pulled or touched or twisted the arm of the claimant or attempted to recover the acknowledged copy of the letter. There was no physical contact whatsoever,” the defendants said, adding that the claims are unfounded and unreasonable and prayed the court to dismissed it in its entirety with substantial cost.
In this article:
In her statement of claim, she stated: ”following the report by the claimant, supplier was blacklisted in a bid to vent his anger and frustration for the rejection of the bribe offered and consequent blacklisting the said supplier instituted an action against the 1st defendant whereupon judgment was delivered in her favour of the 1st defendant.
“In what appeared to be disapproval for the role played by the claimant in the blacklisting of the supplier and the attendant consequence, the claimant colleagues started bullying the claimant unjustifiable and relations she had prior that time enjoyevnst them. The defendants averred that there was never a time the claimant was bullied or harassed by any of the employees or staff of the 1st defendant.
“At no time did 2nd defendant pulled or touched or twisted the arm of the claimant or attempted to recover the acknowledged copy of the letter. There was no physical contact whatsoever,” the defendants said, adding that the claims are unfounded and unreasonable and prayed the court to dismissed it in its entirety with substantial cost.
In this article: