By Amin Kef Sesay
Some former aggrieved employees of the Standard Chartered Bank in Sierra Leone in the recent past decided to seek litigation into what they deem as unfair treatment related to unlawful and arbitrary dismissal.
The Bank is currently battling in the High Court of Sierra Leone presided over by Justice Sengu Koroma over alleged conspiracy and illegal termination of some senior employees.
Making his submission on behalf of the second defendant (Standard Chartered Bank PLC), Attorney Rasford Johnson, said the application is a notice of motion on behalf of the second defendant seeking for an order for the name of the second defendant, Standard Chartered Bank PLC to be struck out of the proceedings.
He said the application for the name of the second defendant to be struck out is based on the fact that it has been unnecessarily mentioned in the matter.
He said they rely on the content of the affidavit pursuant to Order 18 Rule 6 (2) Paragraph A of the High Court Rules, stating that the court on its own motion could strike out any party, who has been unnecessarily mentioned in the matter.
He said it is not clear who have been sued as the second defendant, because it could be Standard Chartered Bank PLC or Standard Chartered Bank.
He submitted that the issue of identification was confusing as to who the 2nd defendant is, noting that the Standard Chartered Bank is the operating company of Standard Chartered Bank group PLC, which is the ultimate parent company of the group.
He said neither Standard Chartered Bank nor the Standard Chartered Bank PLC has any contractual nexus with the plaintiff.
He said the complaint of the plaintiffs is that, they were unlawfully dismissed, thus noting that either Standard Chartered Bank or Standard Chartered Bank PLC employed the plaintiff.
He said the plaintiff letter of employment dated 2007 showed that he was employed by Standard Chartered Bank Sierra Leone Limited and that the letter was signed by the Head of Human Resource of the Bank.
Similarly, the lawyer said the termination letter of the plaintiffs dated 5th February, 2021, was from the Standard Chartered Bank Sierra Leone Limited and not Standard Chartered Bank or Standard Chartered Bank PLC.
He said it was unnecessary for Standard Chartered Bank and Standard Chartered Bank PLC to be a party because they are only shareholders and should not be sued to court, but rather Standard Chartered Bank Sierra Leone who employed them, adding that the claims should be on the employer and not the shareholder.
He said the requirement for one to maintain claims of conspiracy must show who the parties are and their relationship.
He said the particulars of the conspiracy offense only said the defendant, but did not state what the conspirators had done.
Trial was adjourned to Wednesday August 4th.
The plaintiffs are currently in court seeking redress for alleged dismissal after serving the bank for over fifteen to twenty years, respectively.
