Hon. Justice (Prof.) Elizabeth Oji of the Lagos Judicial Division of the National Industrial Court has granted an order restraining the Stanbic IBTC Bank whether acting by itself, agents, privies or however from selling, interfering or taking possession of its former staff, Olubunmi property until 192 months as stated in the contract of the loan agreement, and only if the loan remains unpaid by then.
The Court held that the loan agreement between Olubunmi and Stanbic IBTC is repayable in 192 months and that the bank’s rights over the property can only crystallise in 192 months after the date of the residential property loan’s coming to being.
From facts, the claimant- Olubunmi had submitted that her termination from the Stanbic IBTC Bank was unlawful, unfair, and premeditated. Olubunmi stated that she was silently dismissed without being given any reason or the requisite benefits entitled to her.
Olubunmi maintained that she took a Residential Loan Facility, and the loan was tied to her monthly salary, and the repayment period was calculated to align with her retirement date, which was 11 years away at the time of her employment termination.
Olubunmi stated that the Stanbic IBTC Bank frustrated the repayment of the loan by terminating her employment, which was the only source of income for servicing the loan, and that the Bank has threatened to sell her only residential property to recover the outstanding loan balance.
In defence, the defendant- Stanbic IBTC Bank maintained that the Residential Loan Facility was an independent transaction separate from Olubunmi’s employment because the loan was granted based on a banker-customer relationship and that Olubunmi’s employment status did not affect her obligation to repay the loan.
Stanbic IBTC Bank expressed sympathy with Olubunmi regarding her health condition, but denies any responsibility and that the health issues are unrelated to her employment or termination as alleged.
The Bank argues that Olubunmi’s claims related to mortgages and personal loans do not fall within the jurisdiction of the Court, as those claims are not connected to employment-related disputes. The Stanbic IBTC Bank argues that the Olubunmi case is primarily aimed at preventing the Bank from recovering the outstanding loan after Olubunmi’s termination of employment.
In opposition, Olubunmi’s counsel, Temitope Elusogbon, with Abraham Akaakaa and Tolulope Elusogbon argued that the termination of their client’s employment was wrongful, malicious and discriminatory by failure to follow the proper procedures outlined in the Performance Management Manual and Enduring Performance Policy before terminating her employment, and urged the Court to grant the reliefs sought.
In a well-considered judgment, the presiding Judge, Justice Elizabeth Oji affirmed the jurisdiction of the Court and held that the residential property loan was made in the context of Olubunmi’s employment.
The Court reiterated that the new jurisprudence in industrial and labour matters is that termination without reason is wrongful and/or unlawful, and held the employment termination of Olubunmi as wrongful.
Justice Oji stated that Olubunmi cannot argue that her salary was the only anticipated method of payment for the loan, and stressed that the termination of Olubunmi’s employment did not frustrate the residential property loan agreement.
The Court stated that the loan agreement provides for a monthly repayment within 192 monthly instalments and that any purported earlier call for the complete payment of the loan, before the 192 months, is not acceptable.