EQUITY AND TRUSTS — Unjust Enrichment — Employer Cannot Rely on Own Failure to Obtain Work Permit
Principle Statement
An employer who benefits from nine months of services cannot rely on a hollow defence of illegality for failure to obtain a work permit. The court should not lend itself to a defence that is embarrassing to any conscientious being and an affront to civilised behaviour.
Ratio Decidendi (Source)
Per Pats-Acholonu, JSC, in West Construction Co. Ltd v. Batalha (2006) NLC-123-168-2002(SC) at p. 19; Paras A–C.
"It beats my imagination how the Appellant could in all seriousness and conscience after benefiting from the services of the Respondent for about nine months and refusing to pay him the salaries and allowances freely agreed upon could now fall back on the hollow defence or claim of illegality. … This Court should not lend itself to a defence for breach of contract, which is embarrassing to any conscientious being and is an affront to civilized behaviour, and decency."
Explanation / Scope
An employer who benefited from services cannot rely on his own failure to obtain a work permit as a defence. The principle applies to equity and unjust enrichment.
