UNIT 8

LEGAL REMEDIES

Legal remedies refer to the relief or compensation awarded by a court of law to a party who has suffered harm or injury due to the wrongful conduct of another. These remedies are typically monetary and are aimed at making the injured party whole. In Nigeria, legal remedies for breach of contract are primarily governed by the general principles of contract law and specific statutes like the Contract Act. Legal remedies includes the following;

1. Damages: Damages are the most common legal remedy for breach of contract. They aim to compensate the injured party for the loss suffered due to the breach. See the case of Adigun v. Ayinde (1993) 8 NWLR (Pt. 313) 516 which illustrates the principle of compensatory damages and the case of Shell Petroleum Development Company v. Tiebo VII (2005) 9 NWLR (Pt. 931) 439 which demonstrates the application of consequential damages. The types of damages includes the following;
   
   1. Compensatory damages: These are damages intended to cover the actual loss or damage suffered by the injured party.
   2. Consequential damages: These are damages that cover losses that are not direct but result from the breach.
   3. Nominal damages: These damages are small amounts awarded when a breach occurred, but no actual loss was suffered.
   4. Punitive damages: These damages are rarely awarded in contract cases, these are intended to punish the wrongdoer.
2. Specific performance: Specific performance is an equitable remedy that compels a party to perform their contractual obligations. This remedy is typically used when damages are inadequate to remedy the breach. See the case of Okafor v. Tsokwa (1995) 1 NWLR (Pt. 372) 548 where the court ordered specific performance because monetary damages were inadequate and the case of Jadesimi v. Egin (1991) 5 NWLR (Pt. 191) 128 where specific performance was ordered in a contract for the sale of land.
3. Injunctions: An injunction is an equitable remedy that restrains a party from doing a particular act. There are two main types which are prohibitory injunction which prevents a party from doing something and mandatory injunction which compels a party to do something. See the case of Akibu v. Oduntan (1991) 2 NWLR (Pt. 171) 1 where a prohibitory injunction was granted to prevent the defendant from continuing with a wrongful act and the case of Kotoye v. Central Bank of Nigeria (1989) 1 NWLR (Pt. 98) 419 which demonstrates the use of a mandatory injunction.

EQUITABLE REMEDIES

Equitable remedies are non-monetary solutions granted by courts in situations where legal remedies are insufficient to address the harm suffered by a party. These remedies are grounded in principles of fairness and justice. Equitable remedies includes the following;

1. Rescission: Rescission is an equitable remedy that cancels a contract and returns the parties to their pre-contractual positions. This remedy is typically used in cases of misrepresentation, mistake, duress, or undue influence. See the case of Alhaji Ajadi v. Olanrewaju (1969) NMLR 20 where the contract was rescinded due to fraudulent misrepresentation and the case of Sofolahan v. Fowler (2002) 11 NWLR (Pt. 777) 375 where rescission was granted on the grounds of undue influence.
2. Rectification: Rectification is an equitable remedy that allows a written contract to be amended to reflect the true intentions of the parties. See the case of Jadesimi v. Okotie-Eboh (1986) 1 NWLR (Pt. 16) 264 where the court ordered rectification of a contract to correct a mutual mistake and the case of Ogunbambi v. Abowaba (1951) 13 WACA 222 which demonstrates the application of rectification to reflect the true agreement of the parties.

REMEDIES FOR BREACH OF CONTRACT

The remedies for breach of contract in Nigeria can be classified into legal and equitable remedies. Legal remedies involve the payment of damages, while equitable remedies include specific performance and injunctions. These remedies includes the following;

1. Damages: Damages are intended to compensate the non-breaching party for losses incurred due to the breach. They can be general damages which are for losses that are the natural result of the breach and special damages which are for specific losses that must be proven with evidence. See the case of Benson v. Ashiru (1967) 1 All NLR 184 where general damages are awarded for breach of contract and the case of Nigeria Produce Marketing Board v. Adewunmi (1972) 11 SC 111 where special damages were awarded for specific losses.
2. Specific performance: As an equitable remedy, specific performance compels a party to fulfill their contractual obligations. It is typically granted when monetary damages are inadequate. See the case of Arum v. Nwobodo (1990) 4 NWLR (Pt. 146) 566 where the court ordered specific performance in a land sale contract and the case of Ebeidebe v. Aghedo (1998) 12 NWLR (Pt. 577) 159 where specific performance was granted as damages were not sufficient.

QUANTUM MERUIT CLAIMS

Quantum meruit refers to a claim for payment for services rendered or work done when no specified contract price exists. It means "as much as he deserves" and is applicable where a contract is deemed invalid, no contract price is agreed upon, and the contract is only partially completed. See the case of UAC v. Taylor (1936) 2 WACA 70 where the court awarded payment on a quantum meruit basis for services rendered and the case of Bilante Int’l Ltd v. NDIC (2011) 15 NWLR (Pt. 1270) 407 where quantum meruit was applied due to the absence of a fixed contract price.

QUASI CONTRACT

A quasi contract is not a true contract but a legal substitute formed to impose equity between parties. It is used to prevent unjust enrichment when one party benefits at the expense of another without a formal agreement. See the case of Osun State Government v. Dalami Nigeria Ltd (2003) 7 NWLR (Pt. 818) 72 where the court applied the principles of quasi contract to prevent unjust enrichment and the case of Obayuwana v. A.G. Bendel State (1982) 12 SC 147 which demonstrates the use of quasi contract to impose fairness. The elements of quasi contract includes the following;

1. Benefit conferred: this is where one party must have conferred a benefit on another.
2. Expectation of payment: this is where the party conferring the benefit must have expected to be paid.
3. Unjust enrichment: this is where the benefit must have been retained unjustly.

CONCLUSION

Legal and equitable remedies play crucial roles in addressing breaches of contract and ensuring justice is served. Damages, specific performance, and injunctions are primary tools for enforcing contractual obligations and compensating for losses. Quantum meruit claims and quasi contracts ensure fairness in situations where formal agreements are absent or incomplete. Understanding these remedies, supported by relevant Nigerian cases and sections, is essential for navigating contract disputes effectively.