UNIT 5

DAMAGES

Damages refer to the monetary compensation awarded by a court to a person who has suffered loss or injury due to the unlawful act or omission of another. The primary aim is to restore the injured party to the position they would have been in had the harm not occurred. In Nigerian law, damages can be categorized into several types, each serving a distinct purpose. The types of damages includes the following;

1. Compensatory damages: Compensatory damages are intended to compensate the injured party for the actual loss suffered. These can be further divided into:
   
   1. Special damages: These are quantifiable losses that the claimant must specifically prove. They include medical expenses, loss of earnings, and other financial losses directly linked to the harm. See the case of Okulate v. Awosanya (2000) 2 NWLR (Pt. 646) 530, where the Supreme Court emphasized the need for special damages to be specifically pleaded and proven.
   2. General damages: These cover non-quantifiable losses such as pain and suffering, emotional distress, and loss of amenity. They are presumed by law and need not be specifically proven. See the case of Ifeanyi Chukwu (OS) Ltd v. Soleh Boneh (Nig) Ltd (2000) 5 NWLR (Pt. 656) 322 where the court awarded general damages for breach of contract.
2. Nominal damages: Nominal damages are awarded when a legal wrong has occurred, but the claimant has not suffered any substantial loss. They serve to recognize the infringement of rights. See the case of Akinkugbe v. E.H (Nig) Ltd (2008) 12 NWLR (Pt. 1098) 375, where the court awarded nominal damages where a breach of contract was established but no significant loss was proven.
3. Exemplary (punitive) damages: Exemplary damages are awarded to punish the defendant for particularly egregious or malicious conduct and to deter similar future behavior. See the case of Eliochin (Nig) Ltd & Ors v. Mbadiwe (1986) 1 NWLR (Pt. 14) 47 which highlighted the circumstances under which exemplary damages could be awarded.
4. Aggravated damages: Aggravated damages are awarded when the defendant's conduct has caused additional harm, such as insult or injury to feelings. This type of damage aims to compensate for the additional harm suffered. See the case of Ogene v. Ogene (2008) 5 NWLR (Pt. 1081) 576, where the court considered the aggravating factors in awarding damages.

REMOTENESS OF DAMAGES

Remoteness of damages refers to the legal limitation on the amount of compensable harm based on its foreseeability. The principle ensures that only losses which are reasonably foreseeable at the time of the wrongful act are recoverable. See the case of Hadley v. Baxendale (1854) 9 Exch 341, which has been adopted in Nigerian jurisprudence and the case of Mobil Oil (Nig) Ltd v. Akinfosile (1969) 1 NMLR 217 where the Supreme Court of Nigeria reiterated the principles laid out in Hadley v. Baxendale, emphasizing that the foreseeability of damages is crucial in determining their remoteness. According to this test, damages are recoverable if:

1. They arise naturally from the breach (the first limb).
2. They were within the contemplation of both parties at the time the contract was made (the second limb).

ASSESSMENT OF DAMAGES

The assessment of damages involves determining the appropriate amount of compensation to be awarded to the injured party. This process requires a careful evaluation of the losses suffered and the principles governing the calculation of damages. The principles of assessment includes the following;

1. Restitutio in integrum: The primary principle guiding the assessment of damages is restitutio in integrum, which means restoring the injured party to the position they would have been in had the injury not occurred. See the case of A.G. Oyo State v. Fairlakes Hotels Ltd (No.2) (1989) 5 NWLR (Pt. 121) 255.
2. Mitigation of damages: this is where the injured party has a duty to mitigate their losses. This means taking reasonable steps to reduce the extent of the damage suffered. See the case of Oshinjinrin & Ors v. Elias & Ors (1970) 1 All NLR 153, where the court emphasized that failure to mitigate can reduce the amount of damages recoverable.
3. Measurement of damages: The measurement of damages varies depending on the nature of the loss:
   
   1. Personal injury: this is where compensation is awarded for medical expenses, loss of earnings, pain and suffering, and loss of amenity. See the case of Adekunle v. United Bank for Africa Plc (2016) LPELR-41124(CA), where the court provided guidance on assessing damages for personal injuries.
   2. Property damage: this is where the cost of repairs or replacement is considered, alongside any consequential losses. See the case of Shell Petroleum Development Company of Nigeria Ltd v. Tiebo VII (2005) 9 NWLR (Pt. 931) 439 which dealt with the assessment of damages for environmental damage.

OCCUPIERS' LIABILITY

Occupiers' liability concerns the duty of care owed by those in control of premises to visitors and trespassers. This area of law ensures that occupiers maintain safe conditions to prevent harm to individuals who enter their premises. In Nigeria, occupiers' liability is governed by both common law principles and statutory provisions. The key statute is the Occupiers' Liability Act while the duty of care owed by an occupier varies depending on the status of the entrant and they include the following:

1. Lawful visitors: this is where occupiers owe a duty to ensure that lawful visitors are reasonably safe while on their premises. This duty extends to ensuring the premises are free from dangers that the occupier knows or ought to know about. See the case of Olawoyin v. Attorney General of Northern Nigeria (1961) All NLR 269, where the court discussed the duty owed to lawful visitors.
2. Trespassers: this is where the duty owed to trespassers is generally lower than that owed to lawful visitors. However, occupiers must still refrain from causing intentional or reckless harm. See the case of Idahosa v. Oronsaye (1959) WRNLR 35 which illustrated the limited duty owed to trespassers.

BREACH OF DUTY OF OCCUPIERS LIABILITY

A breach of the duty of care occurs when the occupier fails to meet the required standard, leading to harm. The injured party must prove that the breach caused their injury. See the case of Adebiyi v. UMTHMB (2014) LPELR-24209(CA), where the court examined the breach of duty and causation in occupiers' liability.

DEFENSES OF OCCUPIERS LIABILITY

Occupiers can raise several defenses against claims of liability, including the following:

1. Consent: this happens if the injured party consented to the risk, the occupier might not be liable. See the case of A.C.B. v. Apugo (1995) 6 NWLR (Pt. 399) 65.
2. Contributory negligence: this happens if the injured party's negligence contributed to their injury, the damages awarded might be reduced. See the case of Ogunola v. Eiyekole (1990) 4 NWLR (Pt. 146) 632.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, understanding damages, their remoteness, assessment, and the principles of occupiers' liability is crucial for navigating the legal landscape in Nigeria. Each aspect plays a significant role in ensuring that justice is served and that injured parties receive appropriate compensation.