site logo

OLU CHARLES O. FALUYI V. NIGERIAN UNION OF TEACHERS (2022)

Case Digest

Supreme Court of Nigeria

Coram

  • Olabode Rhodes-Vivour JSC
  • Kudirat M. Olatokunbo Kekere-Ekun JSC
  • Chima Centus Nweze JSC (Read the Lead Judgment)
  • Amina Adamu Augie JSC
  • Uwani Musa Abba-Aji JSC

Parties:

Appellants:

  • Olu Charles O. Faluyi
  • Olusola Adojutelegan

Respondents:

  • Nigerian Union of Teachers
  • Nigerian Labour Congress
  • Hon. Minister of Employment, Labour and Productivity
  • Registrar of Trade Unions
Suit number: SC.432/2014

Background

This case revolves around a dispute concerning the constitutionality and competence of judicial panels in Nigeria. The first respondent, Nigerian Union of Teachers (NUT), filed a case against the appellants, who represent the Academic Staff Union of Secondary Schools (ASUSS), challenging the registration of ASUSS as a trade union, citing that the interests of secondary school teachers were adequately protected by NUT.

The Federal High Court was asked to clarify the powers of the Minister of Employment, Labour, and Productivity and the Registrar of Trade Unions concerning registering trade unions under the Trade Union Act. Initially, the Federal High Court dismissed challenges to its jurisdiction raised by the appellants, which led to subsequent appeals—eventually reaching the Supreme Court.

Issues

The Supreme Court was tasked with examining whether:

  1. The judgment delivered on 11 July 2014 was competent given that it was rendered by a panel not constituted for the hearing.
  2. Adequate judicial processes were followed regarding the composition of the court.

Ratio Decidendi

The court concluded that, according to sections 234 and 247 of the Constitution of Nigeria, a court is only properly constituted when it consists of the required number of justices. If the panel differs from that which heard the arguments, the outcome can constitute a nullity.

  1. Section 234 mandates that the Supreme Court consists of no less than five justices.
  2. The Court of Appeal requires a minimum of three justices for any valid verdict, and must operate with the same justices who heard the case during the decision-making process.

Court Findings

The Supreme Court reinforced the principle that any defect related to a court's competence is significant; such a defect can lead to proceedings being declared null and void, regardless of how well the argument was conducted. In this instance, Justice E. Ekanem, who did not participate in the hearing on 9 June, later contributed to a judgment on 11 July, thereby affecting the integrity of the court's decision.

The lead judgment succinctly asserted that allowing a judge who did not partake in the initial hearings to deliver a judgment contravened the legal requirement for a fair hearing, as outlined in the Constitution.

Conclusion

The appeal was allowed, meaning that the judgment given on 11 July 2014 was set aside as a nullity. The case has been remitted to the Court of Appeal for a fresh hearing before a properly constituted panel.

Significance

This ruling is pivotal within the Nigerian judiciary as it underscores the necessity for all justices involved in a case's hearing to also be present for judgment delivery, safeguarding the rights to fair hearings and judicial transparency. The decision reaffirms constitutional standards for the composition of panels in legal proceedings, reflecting the judiciary's commitment to upholding due process.