LABOUR LAW — Disciplinary Committee — Duty to Hear Oral Testimony — When Queries and Replies Suffice
Ratio Decidendi
Per Onnoghen, JSC, in Imonikhe v. Unity Bank Plc (2011) NLC-123-68-2003(SC) at p. 9; Paras B—E:
"Can the allegations against the appellant not be proven or unproven by merely going/wading through the queries and the replies thereto without going further to hear oral testimony from the appellant at a disciplinary committee hearing? I think a conclusion on the matter can be easily reached by examining the queries and replies thereto to see whether the replies satisfactorily explain the conduct of the appellant alleged to amount to misconduct. Where the committee comes to the conclusion that it does, then the alleged misconduct has not been proved but where the answer is in the negative, then it has been proved."
Explanation / Scope
This principle establishes that a disciplinary committee may determine allegations by examining queries and replies without oral testimony, concluding that misconduct is proved if the replies do not satisfactorily explain the conduct. The principle applies in employment disciplinary proceedings. It ensures that queries and replies may suffice. The principle reflects the flexibility of disciplinary procedures. It prevents unnecessary oral hearings. The court must assess whether the replies explain the conduct. The principle provides guidance on disciplinary committee procedures.