damages

Damage is defined as pecuniary compensation obtainable by a successful party in an action for a wrong in tort or breach of contract. Brig-Gen. Adekunle v. Rockview Hotel Ltd. (2004) FWLR (Pt. 188) 1037. It is the monetary compensation for loss or injury to a person or property; thereby being sum of money accruing from the wrongdoer as compensation for the wrong done. Jegede & Ors. v. Bamidele & Ors. (2006) All FWLR (Pt. 315) 109.

Damages is to put a party in the same position as far as monetary compensation can for his violated right. Smurfit Cases (Nig.) Ltd. & Anor. v. Owners of M.V. Gongola Hope & Anor. (2002) FWLR (Pt. 175) 566.

The following are the kinds of damages that exist:

• a. General damages: This compensates the claimant for the non-monetary aspects of the specific harm suffered. This is usually termed ‘pain, suffering and loss of amenity’. General damages are generally awarded only in claims brought by individuals, when they have suffered personal harm.
• b. Special damages: This is to compensate the claimant for the quantifiable monetary losses suffered by the plaintiff. Special damages can include direct losses such as the amounts the claimant had to spend to try to migrate problems and consequential or economic losses resulting from lost profits in business.
• c. Punitive damages: This is also termed exemplary damages. They are not awarded in order to compensate the plaintiff, but in order to reform or deter the defendant and similar persons from pursuing a course of action such as that which damaged the plaintiff. Punitive damages are awarded only in special cases where conduct was egregiously invidious, and are over and above the amount of compensatory damages.
• d. Nominal damage: This is awarded where a plaintiff establishes the violation of his right by the defendant, but is unable to show how he suffered actual damage as a result of the tort committed by the defendant.
• e. Aggravated damages: This may be awarded where the defendant’s motives and conduct were such as to aggravate the injury to the plaintiff. They are a species of compensatory damages in that their purpose is to compensate the plaintiff for the injury to his feelings of dignity and pride, e.g. in cases of insolent and high-handed trespass to land as in the case of Dosunmu v. Lagos City Council (1966) L.L.R. 63, or to the person as in the case of Nwankwa v. Ajaegbu (1978) 2 L.R.N. 230.

A compensatory damage is a sum of money awarded by the court to indemnify a person for the particular loss, detriment or injury suffered as a result of the unlawful conduct of another. It differs from punitive damages which punishes a defendant for his conduct as a deterrent to the future commission of an act. Emirate Airline v. Ngonadi (No. 2) (2014) 9 NWLR (Pt. 1413) 506.

The measure of damages in a breach of contract is the loss flowing naturally from the breach and is incurred in direct consequence of the violation, the object is to put the injured party. So far as money can do in the same position as if the contract has been performed. Afribank Plc. v. Aminu Ishola Investment Ltd. (2003) FWLR (Pt. 141) 1841.

The award of damages should be so far as money can compensate injured party in reparation for damages for wrongful act for all natural and direct consequences of wrongful act. Union Bank of Nigeria Plc. v. Pastor Okoror (2002) FWLR (Pt. 122) 24.

The considerations for the award of damages in personal injury cases include bodily pain and suffering sustained by the plaintiff which may re-occur, the degree of disability or disfigurement, loss of earning resultant from disability or disfigurement, length of time for recuperation, loss of amenities of life, age, status and life expectation. Hanseatic International Ltd. v. Usang (2003) FWLR (Pt. 149) 1563.

General damages are presumed by law as the direct natural consequence or probable consequence of the act complained of having been averred as suffered in the plaintiff’s pleading. U. A. C. of Nigeria Plc. v. Madam Irole (2002) FWLR (Pt. 113) 351.

General damages from the point of view of proof is classified into; that in which damages may either be inferred; such as in cases of defamation or of personal injury to the plaintiff when pain and suffering may be presumed and that in which they will be inferred but must be proved, such as where damages arise by way of general loss of business following an injury. Where the injury is within that to be inferred evidence will not be allowed to be given by a plaintiff of loss of a particular transaction or customer in a manner that would the claim to the species of special damages. S.P.D.C. v. Katad Nigeria Ltd. & Anor. (2005) All FWLR (Pt. 263) 675.

Where a party has been fully compensated under one head of damages, it amounts to double compensation to obtain compensation for the same injury under another head of damages. Kopek Construction Ltd. v. Ekisola (2003) FWLR (Pt. 139) 1481.

Where losses are sufficiently rewarded in special damages then general damages would amount to double compensation. Loss of earnings is special damages and must be pleaded with particulars. Ndinwa v. Igbinedion (2000) FWLR (Pt. 30) 2673.

The court is not to vary the damages sought. Award of damages must be limited to the case. A. Madi & Sons Ltd. (No. 1) v. Sarr (No. 1) [1997-2001] GR 712.

The difference between special damages and general damages lies in the determination of their measure or quantum; special damages has definite measure while general damages does not. General damages is awarded in the opinion and judgment of reasonable man, general damages can be inferred from defamation personal injury presuming damages and have to be proved by way of general loss of business to a limited extent otherwise, it would become special damages, prospective expenditure is money claimable under general damages because it has yet to crystallize or materialize actual disbursement. Alhaji Ya’u v. Dikwa (2001) FWLR (Pt. 62) 1987.

General damages can only be awarded on the basis of legal evidence of probative value adduced for the establishment of an actionable wrong or injury and should never be awarded as a largesse or out of sympathy born of extraneous considerations. Brig-Gen. Adekunle v. Rockview Hotel Ltd. (2004) FWLR (Pt. 188) 1037.

Special damages are those pecuniary losses which have crystallized in terms of cash and value before trial. Barmani Ventures Limited v. Kingsfoam & Chemical Industries Limited (2002) FWLR (Pt. 124) 412. A damage is special in the sense that it is easily discernible and quantified. It does not rest on speculation, approximation or estimate or such like fractions. The law will not infer special damages from the nature of the act complained of; it has to strictly proved and the pleadings should particularize the damages to enable court decide on quantum of damages. Triana Ltd. v. Polymakers Ltd. (2002) FWLR (Pt. 93) 2004.

Special damages consists of items of loss which must be particularized and strictly proved by admissible and believable evidence. Smurfit Cases (Nig.) Ltd. & Anor. v. Owners of M.V. Gongola Hope & Anor. (2002) FWLR (Pt. 103) 311. It is however not enough that the evidence is unchallenged or uncontradicted or that it is mere ipse dixit by the plaintiff.

In a claim for exemplary damages, the claimant must show or establish by evidence that the injury or loss the plaintiff has suffered is due to malicious act of the defendant and that the conduct of the defendant is high-handed, insolent, vindictive or malicious, showing contempt of the plaintiff’s right or disregard of every principle which actuated the conduct. GFK Investment Nig. Ltd. v. NITEL Plc. (2006) All FWLR (Pt. 299) 1402.

Exemplary damages cannot be awarded in a purely contractual action. Umoetuk v. Union Bank Plc. (2001) FWLR (Pt. 81) 1849. It is generally accepted that exemplary damages are not recoverable as a matter of course in action in contract such as in a case of a dishonored cheque; exemplary damages must also be pleaded. Afribank Plc. v. Aminu Ishola Investment Ltd. (2003) FWLR (Pt. 141) 1841.

Aggravated damages are awarded where the damages are at large and the conduct of the defendant was such as to injure the plaintiff’s feelings, dignity or pride. Elochin Nig. Ltd. v. Mbadiwe (1986) 1 NWLR (Pt. 14) 47.

Aggravated damages added to special damages depends on the conduct of the defendant oppressiveness, wanton recklessness could found an aggravated circumstance for aggravated damages. Alhaji Oatru & Sons Ltd. v. Audu Idris & Anor. (1999) 4 SC (Pt. ii) 87.

In assessing damages in an action for libel, the court takes into consideration the following factors: a. The conduct of the plaintiff. b. His position and standing. c. The nature of the libel. d. The mode and extent of the publication. e. The whole conduct of the defendant from the time when the libel was published down to the very moment of the court’s verdict. Inland Bank (Nig.) Plc. v. F & S Co. Ltd. (2010) 15 NWLR (Pt. 1216) 395.

Interest is essentially income earned from monetary debt. How it accrues is what the courts want a plaintiff to prove. The dynamics of interest arise in the fiction of treating accruals from a business concern that has crystallized into a monetary debt differently from the potential yield of a transaction.

A plaintiff is expected to plead and prove grounds on which claim for interest is based. Obanta Community Bank Ltd. v. Ajayi & Ors. (2002) FWLR (Pt. 92) 1716.

A pre-judgment interest is one which is calculated on the principal sum owing under a judgment at the prejudgment rate from the day the cause of action arose accrued to the jay of Judgment. Prejudgment interest qualifies to arise as a liquidated demand and bears the character of liquidated damages.

Prejudgment interest is usually dependent on the agreement of the parties and the custom of the trade concerned. Rate of post judgment interest is usually fixed by the rules of the court. Hausa v. First Bank Plc. (2000) FWLR (Pt. 29) 2516.