AGABA V. OTOBUSIN

• Pages: 186-189

186



NIGERIAN SUPREME COURT CASES

[1961] N.S.C.C.

AGABA V. OTOBUSIN.

5

G. K. AGABA



APPELLANT

V

C. A. OTOBUSIN



RESPONDENT



10

SUIT NO. FSC 97/1961

FEDERAL SUPREME COURT.

BRETT,



F.J.

TAYLOR,



F.J.

BAIRAMIAN,



F.J.



15

15th June, 1961.

Remedies- Damages - Measure - Reduction on appeal.

ISSUE:



20

1. Under what circumstances will an appellate court disturb the award of damages

by a trial court.

FACTS:

The plaintiff (respondent) was awarded £3,830 for injuries in a lorry accident.

He was in bed for five months and a half, because of the injury to his left hip; after



25

three more months he went to the hospital for nervous ailments for about two

months because of depression and delusion, and after discharge was kept under

observation for a year. He was 47; he did not suffer any loss of expectation of

life; he was not incapacitated from his work, but got promotion in the Government

service. He was left with two ugly scars on his face, and a permanent deformity



30

in his left hip, which prevents him from walking normally. The orthopaedic sur-

geon thought it was fairly certain he would get osteo-arthritis with fixation of the

thigh bone and in the pelvis, which would lead to osteo-arthritis of the spine and

of the other hip a:so; and the nervous specialist thought his nervous disorder might

recur.



35

The trial judge made awards under Pain and Suffering covering the injury to

the left hip and the probability of further pain there, the cuts and bruises, the men-

tal illness and the possibility of its recurring; also, under loss of Amenities of Life,

for the inability to ride a motor cycle, and the inability to walk normally; also, under

Inconvenience and Discomfort, for difficulty of movement, the embarrassment of



40

the facial scars, the inconvenience of perhaps having to go to hospital again.

HELD:

1.

Damages should not be disturbed unless the trial judge acted upon some wrong

principle of law, or unless the award was so extremely high or so very small as

to make it an entirely erroneous estimate of the damage.



45

2.

The trial judge granted compensation more than once for substantially the same

matters, was over-generous, and overlooked the fact that the plaintiff did not

suffer in his earning capacity; and it appeared that he had used a motor cycle

for his employment.

50

[As to

measure of damages,

see 12 HALSBURY'S LAWS 4th Edition 446 Paras

1146 & 1147.]