Industrial court dismisses ASUU suit over salary during strike

 

ABUJA, Nigeria – The National Industrial Court has dismissed the suit filed by the Academic Staff Union of Universities (ASUU) regarding the payment of salaries during the period they embarked on strike.

President of the Court, Justice Benedict Kanyip dismissed the suit, stressing that it amounts to abuse of court process, frivolous, and vexatious.

The Court ruled that ASUU’s current case was considered as res judicata, meaning the relief sought regarding the payment of salaries for the strike period was an issue already decided upon in a prior case.

Justice Kanyip emphasized that the attempt by ASUU to litigate this matter again was an attempt to revisit a case they deliberately chose not to defend earlier.

The crux of the matter was that ASUU had previously filed a suit where they had the opportunity to address all the issues they raised in the current case, including the discrimination aspect. However, due to a strategic decision not to file a defense, they lost that chance. The Judge highlighted that such strategic decisions by legal counsel shouldn’t be excused by the court, and ASUU’s failure to take advantage of the earlier opportunity led to their current inability to bring up these arguments again.

In essence, Justice Kanyip’s ruling underscored that ASUU’s present suit was an attempt to bring up issues they had intentionally avoided addressing earlier, thereby attempting to re-litigate through a backdoor approach. The Court held ASUU accountable for their strategic blunders in handling the previous case, emphasizing that they cannot now seek to re-litigate a matter they chose not to defend when they had the chance.

As a consequence of this decision, the Court also ordered ASUU to pay a sum of Five Hundred Thousand Naira (N500,000) to the Attorney-General of the Federation within 30 days.

This ruling highlights the importance of diligence and strategic legal maneuvers in handling legal proceedings, emphasizing that parties cannot evade consequences for their prior tactical decisions in court matters.