LEGAL PRINCIPLE: EVIDENCE LAW – Burden of Proof – Unilateral Employer Action – Employer Must Justify Compulsory Retirement of Public Servant
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
To force a public servant into retirement, that is, before he gets to his retirement age is an unusual action against him in his career. Such an action could, admittedly, be due to a variety of reasons... When an employer relies on one or more of these reasons, he would be expected to have facts or the law in support. The burden is on him to satisfy the court on this. To place the burden of proof wrongly on a party will usually lead to a miscarriage of justice.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
Per Uwaifo, JSC, in Psychiatric Hospital Management Board v. Ejitagha (2000) NLC-471995(SC) at p. 2; Paras A–C.
"To force a public servant into retirement, that is, before he gets to his retirement age is an unusual action against him in his career. Such an action could, admittedly, be due to a variety of reasons... When an employer relies on one or more of these reasons, he would be expected to have facts or the law in support. The burden is on him to satisfy the court on this. To place the burden of proof wrongly on a party will usually lead to a miscarriage of justice."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
Compulsory retirement before normal retirement age is an unusual, adverse action. The employer bears the burden of justifying it with facts or law. Placing the burden on the employee leads to miscarriage of justice. The employer must prove compliance with statutory conditions and that the action was warranted. This recognises the imbalance of power between employer and employee. The employee should not have to prove the negative—that retirement was unjustified. The employer initiates the action and has access to reasons and evidence. Fairness requires the employer to bear the burden of justification.