The National Industrial Court in Port Harcourt has ordered Steam Broadcasting & Communications to immediately compute and pay the terminal benefits of its former employee, Udofia Kingsley, and awarded him ₦5 million in general damages for breach of duty of care and unfair labour practice.
Delivering judgment, Hon. Justice Muhammad Adamu Hamza held that although Kingsley failed to establish that his permanent blindness resulted from his employment, the company failed to provide evidence that it supplied him with the required personal protective equipment (PPE). The court also ruled that the company’s failure to compute and pay his terminal benefits following the termination of his employment constituted an unfair labour practice.
Kingsley told the court that despite repeatedly requesting protective equipment, Steam Broadcasting failed to provide it and instead threatened to dismiss him whenever he complained about unsafe working conditions.
He further claimed that prolonged exposure to workplace hazards gradually damaged his eyesight, leaving him permanently blind.
According to him, the company paid for only one round of treatment following an eye examination before requiring him to bear subsequent medical expenses until his employment was terminated because his services were no longer needed.
The claimant also argued that, unlike other employees whose appointments were terminated, he was not paid his terminal benefits, compensation, or other outstanding entitlements, despite returning all company property as instructed.
However, Steam Broadcasting denied the allegations, maintaining that Kingsley supervised maintenance activities while specialist artisans carried out welding operations. The company also argued that employees were provided with appropriate protective equipment and medical health insurance, adding that Kingsley never requested any safety equipment that was refused.
Counsel to the company further submitted that medical examinations confirmed Kingsley suffered from advanced glaucoma unrelated to his employment. The defence argued that no expert medical evidence established a connection between his work and the loss of his sight and urged the court to dismiss the suit.
Counsel to Kingsley, however, argued that the company breached its duty of care by failing to provide a safe working environment and the necessary protective equipment.
Counsel also submitted that the Employees’ Compensation Act protects both permanent and casual employees and urged the court to grant all the reliefs sought.
In his judgment, Justice Hamza held that the medical evidence merely established that Kingsley suffered from glaucoma and did not connect the condition to welding flashes, chemicals, or any workplace exposure. He noted that no ophthalmologist or other medical expert testified that the blindness resulted from his employment.
The court also found that Kingsley stated his eye condition began around 2014 or 2015, before his employment with Steam Broadcasting officially commenced in October 2016. Justice Hamza ruled that the company could not be held liable for a medical condition that predated the employment relationship.
However, the judge held that although Steam Broadcasting claimed it provided personal protective equipment, it failed to produce documentary evidence showing the equipment had been issued or call any officer responsible for its distribution.
Justice Hamza further ruled that, having worked for the company from October 2016 to November 2022, Kingsley was entitled to his terminal benefits. He held that the company’s failure to compute and pay those benefits after terminating his employment amounted to an unfair labour practice warranting judicial sanction.
The court therefore ordered Steam Broadcasting & Communications to immediately compute and pay Kingsley’s terminal benefits and awarded him ₦5 million in general damages for breach of duty of care and unfair labour practice.
However, the court dismissed Kingsley’s claim for compensation in respect of his permanent blindness, ruling that although the company failed to prove it supplied him with personal protective equipment, he did not establish the necessary medical link between that failure and the glaucoma that caused his loss of sight.
