Introduction
Multinational Enterprises (MNEs) function throughout numerous jurisdictions, creating advanced international provide chains. By utilising international subsidiaries, MNEs make the most of decrease operational prices and versatile labour requirements, which improve competitiveness and assist development. Nonetheless, issues have arisen relating to MNEs limiting wages and advantages, decreasing security requirements, and undermining primary labour rights.
In Nigeria, the Nationwide Industrial Court docket (NICN) protects MNE workers’ rights, alongside Worldwide Framework Agreements (IFAs) and labour rights conventions. Efficient enforcement of international judgments is important for making certain these protections, but challenges persist resulting from inflexible interpretations. This text examines the enforcement procedures in Nigeria and presents insights into how MNE workers can navigate jurisdictional obstacles, together with suggestions for enchancment.
Rules of Software and Enforcement of Overseas Judgements in Nigeria
Typically, the enforcement of international judgments in Nigeria is ruled by some laws, such because the Reciprocal Enforcement of Overseas Judgments Ordinance (“the 1958 Ordinance”), The Overseas Judgements (Reciprocal Enforcement) Act (“the FJA”), The Structure of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 [(as amended) the Constitution], the Sheriffs and Civil Course of Act (SCPA) , and the Interpretation Act . Procedurally, in Nigeria, international judgments are enforced by way of two strategies: enforcement by way of a superior court docket of document in Nigeria, both by the use of an motion at frequent regulation or by reciprocal enforcement. These procedures might be examined under.
Enforcement of Overseas Judgement by way of an Motion at Widespread Regulation
Underneath this methodology, a contemporary motion is instituted at a court docket with comparable jurisdiction by way of a writ of summons, with the judgment being the reason for motion which needn’t undergo the rigours of a substantive trial. Moreover, the Applicant, who’s the judgment creditor, is anticipated to accompany the writ of summons with an utility for abstract judgment or an utility to enlist the matter beneath the undefended checklist. Part 3(2) of the FJA spells out the circumstances precedent as follows:
a. The international judgment should be ultimate and conclusive between the events;
b. There may be payable thereunder a sum of cash, not being a sum payable in respect of taxes or different fees of a like nature or in respect of a advantageous or different penalty; and
c. It’s given after the approaching into operation of the order directing that this a part of the FJA shall prolong to that international nation.
To implement a judgment by way of abstract process in Nigeria, the Applicant should file an utility supported by an affidavit, proof that the judgment is unexecuted, a writ of summons, an authorized true copy of the international judgment, copies of different related reveals, and a written tackle satisfying the circumstances in Part 3(2) of the FJA.
Reciprocal Enforcement
The FJA permits a international judgment creditor in Nigeria to use to a superior court docket to register a international judgment inside six years from the judgment date or after the final attraction judgment. A judgment can’t be registered if it has been totally happy or is unenforceable within the authentic court docket’s nation. Registration offers the judgment the identical impact as an area judgment. Key to this course of is the precept of reciprocity, which requires the international court docket to implement Nigerian judgments as properly. The applying should be made by Movement Ex Parte, supported by an affidavit and a written tackle proving reciprocal enforcement. The enforcement utility should tackle: (i) the relevant authorized regime, (ii) the suitable court docket for jurisdiction, (iii) the debtor’s attraction rights, and (iv) the timeframe for imposing the international judgment.
Enforcement of Overseas Judgements beneath the NICN
In Nigeria, the Nationwide Industrial Court docket of Nigeria (NICN) ought to ordinarily have unique jurisdiction for imposing international judgments referring to labour, employment and industrial relations issues. This aligns with the authorized rules requiring the Nigerian Court docket to have substantive jurisdiction to initially decide the disputes culminating within the international judgment. Key authorized provisions to be thought-about on this regard are part 2(1) of the Overseas Judgments Act (FJA), which defines “superior courts in Nigeria,” as compared with sections 254D (1) of the Structure that gives that the NICN shall have all of the powers of a Excessive Court docket in exercising the jurisdiction conferred on it beneath the Structure or an Act of the Nationwide Meeting. Sections 254C (1) and 254F (1) of the Structure assert that the NICN has unique jurisdiction over civil issues associated to labour, employment, commerce unions, and industrial relations.
Regardless of the clear provisions of the regulation, the Nationwide Industrial Court docket of Nigeria (NICN) within the current case of Richard Saxton v Opi Worldwide Nigeria Restricted has held that it lacked the jurisdiction to implement international judgments. This place was reached not contemplating the current Constitutional amendments and the progressive provisions within the NICN Guidelines 2017. The NICN, whereas placing out the Software and refusing the orders sought by the Applicant, held at pages 5-6 of the Judgment that:
The subject material of this utility is Overseas Judgments Enforcement. The query is: has the Nationwide Industrial Court docket Act 2006, and the 1999 Structure (Third Alteration Act 2010) conferred the Nationwide Industrial Court docket with jurisdiction to implement Overseas Judgments? The reply is No… By part 2 of the Overseas Judgments (Reciprocal Enforcement) Act, ‘superior court docket in Nigeria’ means the Excessive Court docket of a State or of the Federal Territory Abuja, or the Federal Excessive Court docket…The Act has expressly talked about the Courts that may register and implement Overseas Judgments. The Nationwide Industrial Court docket just isn’t so talked about… ‘Jurisdiction is to not be equated with energy…for all the explanations said above…” (Emphasis equipped).
Though we agree that the court docket lacked jurisdiction to recognise and implement the international Judgement in that case given the truth that because the court docket noticed, the Applicant didn’t show that the District Court docket of Texas, Houston, United States which gave the Judgement is a superior court docket of document and that there’s reciprocity in respect of recognition and enforcement of judgements between Nigeria and the USA as required by part 4 of the FJA; we disagree with the ratio of the choice as highlighted above. The ratio marked a big setback for the Nigerian labour regulation regime – probably undermining hard-won protections and setting a regarding precedent. The choice didn’t think about provisions of Order 47, Guidelines 28 and 29 of the NICN Guidelines 2017, which set out the process for registration, utility, and enforcement of a international judgement within the NICN.
However the NICN choice in Saxton’s case, our place is that the NICN can implement international judgments for the next causes. First, the Structure of Nigeria is the supreme regulation, and its definition of superior courts prevails over that of every other Act together with the FJA. Second, the precept of implied modification applies – when a later Act conflicts with an earlier one, it usually means the sooner Act has been amended. Consequently, the Third Alteration Act, particularly part 254C of the Structure 1999 (as amended), which establishes the NICN as a superior court docket of data and descriptions the NICN’s jurisdiction, implicitly amends the provisions of the FJA. Due to this fact, we consider it’s a manifest absurdity to carry that the NICN can not implement international judgements in Nigeria, provided that the NICN is the one court docket with substantive jurisdiction on industrial, employment and labour issues in Nigeria.
Considerably, Order 47 Guidelines 28 and 29 of the NICN Guidelines 2017 have clearly spelt out the process for registration, utility for depart, and enforcement of a international judgement beneath the NICN. Rule 28 offers that:
When a Judgment, Ruling or Order of a court docket of international jurisdiction is to be enforced in Nigeria by the Court docket, the occasion looking for the enforcement of the judgment, ruling or order shall register the licensed true copy (CTC) of the Judgment, Ruling or Order having the seal of the international Court docket jurisdiction, the signature of the choose who delivered the Judgement or made the Order and the date the Judgment was delivered or that the Order was made with the Registry.
By the NICN Guidelines, for the NICN to acknowledge and implement a labour-related international judgement, the applicant should first search depart of the Court docket, by an utility made ex parte. The Software should be accompanied by a press release setting out the identify and outline of the applicant; the Judgement, Ruling or Order to be enforced with particulars and particulars; and an affidavit in assist.
Due to this fact, workers of MNEs who needs to implement any international judgment in Nigeria can strategy the NICN on the energy of the Constitutional provisions and the NICN Guidelines highlighted above, and implement the judgements, supplied the circumstances beneath sections 3 or 4 of the FJA, and Order 47 Guidelines 28 and 29 of the NICN Guidelines are happy.
CONCLUSION
Whereas we await a definitive judicial pronouncements on the rights of workers of MNEs to implement international labour-related judgments within the NICN, we be aware that one clear factor is that the FJA’s non-mention of the NICN (because the Court docket erroneously held in Saxon’s case) has been overridden by the mixed results of the provisions of part 254C of the Structure of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1999 (as amended) and Order 47, Guidelines 28 & 29 of the NICN Guidelines 2017, recognizing the NICN as a superior court docket in Nigeria, and empowering the NICN to recognise and implement labour-related international judgements.
Marvis Oduogu is a Workforce Lead at Stren & Blan Companions and supervises the Agency’s Taxation, Immigration, Labour and Employment Observe Teams. Ifeanyi Ezechukwu is a Senior Affiliate, while Shamsudeen Kazeem is an Affiliate, each within the Agency’s Taxation, Immigration, Labour and Employment Observe Teams.
Stren & Blan Companions is a full-service business Regulation Agency that gives authorized providers to numerous native and worldwide Clientele. The Enterprise Counsel is a weekly column by Stren & Blan Companions that gives thought management perception on enterprise and authorized issues.
