Ratio DecidendiRatio DecidendiRatio DecidendiRatio Decidendi



IYASE
V.
UBTH MANAGEMENT BOARD

(1999) JELR 45344 (CA)    

Court of Appeal  ·  CA/B/61/98 ·  17 Jun 1999 ·  Nigeria
 · 
Other Citations
Iyase v. U.M.T.H.M.B. (2000) 2 NWLR (Pt.643), pg. 47 P. O. U. IYASE v. UNIVERSITY OF BENIN TEACHING HOSPITAL MANAGEMENT BOARD
lyase v.U.B.T.H.M.B. (2000) 2 NWLR (Pt. 643) 45
CORAM
MAHMUD MOHAMMED Justice of The Court of Appeal of Nigeria SAKA ADEYEMI IBIYEYE Justice of The Court of Appeal of Nigeria FRANCIS FEDODE TABAI Justice of The Court of Appeal of Nigeria

Ratio Decidendi

Core Terms Beta
respondent
exhibit a
conditions of service
learned counsel
learned trial judge
statutory flavour
trial court
amended statement of claim
exhibit b
appointment of the appellant
benin city
common ground
disciplinary committee
leading judgment
only issue
special provisions
technical staff
chief administrative officer
considered judgment
contractual relationship of master
crucial question
edo state high court
exhibit c
exhibits a
exhibits d
exhibits l
exhibits p
exhibits r
following conditions
following terms
interdiction of the appellant
offer of appointment
office of assistant security officer
pensionable employee of the respondent
plaintiff claims
purported termination of his appointment
reconstitution of boards
said judgment
satisfaction of the secretary of the board
servant relationships
service of the defendants
status of the appellant
such averments
suit no. b
termination of the appointment of the plaintiff
university teaching hospitals
vis contract of service

IBIYEYE, JCA (Delivering the Leading Judgment): This appeal is against the decision of Idahosa J., of the Edo State High Court sitting in Benin in Suit No. B/371/94 wherein the appellant as plaintiff sued the respondent as defendant claiming reliefs which are particularised in his writ of summons and re-iterated as formulated in paragraph 23 of the Amended Statement of Claim. Paragraph 23 of the Amended Statement of Claim reads:-

"23. Whereof the Plaintiff claims as follows:-

1. A declaration that the termination of the appointment of the plaintiff by the Defendants (sic) from their employment before the retiring age of 55 years was unconstitutional, null and void.

2. A declaration that the Plaintiff is still in the service of the Defendants (sic) and entitled to be re-instated to the office of post (sic) or position he held before the purported termination of his appointment or to any other appropriate or comparative office or post or position.

3. An order directing the Defendants (…

There's more. Sign in to continue reading.

judy.legal is the comprehensive database of case law and legislation from Ghana, Kenya and Nigeria. Gain seamless access to over 20,000 cases, recent judgments, statutes, and rules of court.

Get started   Login