GENERAL DAMAGES AND SPECIAL DAMAGES, DISTINCTION BETWEEN

• Date: 06 February 2019

(1) "General damages are presumed damages from a breach of duty or contract and need not be specifically proved. In the case of Hon. Nze Herbert Osuji & Anor. v. Anthony Isiocha (1989) 3 N.W.L.R. (Pt. 111) 623 at 636, paras. C-D per Uwais, J.S.C. (as he then was) explained the meaning of "special damages" and "general damages" and the difference between them as follows: "It is settled principle that if the damages are special in nature, credible evidence will have to be called in order that the amount pleaded may be proved. Without such proof no special damages can be awarded. On the other hand, the quantum of general damages need not be pleaded or proved; for and it is generally presumed by law. The manner, therefore, in which general damages is quantified is by relying on what would be the opinion and judgment of a reasonable person - See Odulaja v. Haddad (1973) 11 S.C. 357 at p. 360; Incar (Nig.) Ltd v. Benson Transport Ltd. (1975) 3 S.C. 117; Omonuwa v. Wahabi (1976) 4S.C. 37; Lar v. Stirling Astaldi Ltd. (1977) 11-12 S.C. 53 at p. 62." Also, this Court in the case of Alhaji Ahmadu Gari v. Seirafina Nigeria Limited & Anor. (2008) All F.W.L.R. (Pt. 399) 434 at 454, (2008) 2 N.W.L.R. (Pt. 1070) 1 at p. 27, paras. A-C per Ariwoola, J.C.A. (as he then was) stated as follows: "General damages are "damages that the law presumes follow from the type of wrong complained of; also referred to as "compensatory damages" for harm that so frequently results from the tort for which a party has sued that the harm is reasonably expected and need not be alleged or proved. They do not need to be specifically claimed. Whereas special damages are those "damages that are alleged to have been sustained in the circumstances of a particular wrong". To be awardable, special damages must be specifically claimed and proved. See Black’s Law Dictionary. 8th Edition, pages 417 and 419." From the above statement, it is clear that general damages in respect of breach of duty or contract may not necessarily be pleaded or proved because where there is a breach or violation of a legal right the law presumes that damages naturally flow therefrom."- Per Adumein, J.C.A., in Direct on PC Ltd. v. Binkam (Nig.) Ltd. Suit No. CA/A/633/2011; (2016) 3 N.W.L.R. (Pt. 1498) 50 at 68 - 69.

(2) "The claim of special damages are also in a class of their own, requiring strict proof which can only be established by ascertainable facts which must have been specifically pleaded and strictly proved. (See per I.C. Kutigi J.S.C. in Chief Otonyeseigha Ololo v. Nigerian Agip Oil Co. Ltd & Anor. (2001) 6 N.S.C.Q.R. p. 961 at 969; (2001) 12 N.W.L.R. (Pt. 729) 88 & Calabar East Co-operative Thrift and Credit Society Ltd. and 3 Ors v. Ikot. "It is general damages, not special damages which follows naturally once injury is established and could be awarded nominally" Calabar East Co-operative, Thrift and Credit Society Ltd. v. Ikot (1993) 8 N.W.L.R. (Pt. 311) p. 324 at 334-335." - Per Dongban-Mensem, J.C.A. in S.P.D.C. (Nig.) Ltd. v. Katad (Nig.) Ltd. Suit No. CA/PH/265/2000; (2006) 1 N.W.L.R. (Pt. 960) 198 at 226 - 227.

(3) "On issue 2, formulated by the appellant which issue was adopted by the respondent on different submission, the issue to be determined is on whether from the evidence at the trial, the respondent was entitled to both special and general damages or any award of damages at all. It is settled law; and an aphorism that costs for damages follow the event. While general damages are awarded by the exercise of judicial discretion by the trial Judge where the plaintiff succeeds in his claim, special damages are awarded to compensate the victim in a claim for actual loss sustained; the purpose is to restore the party to a position he would have been if the loss had not occurred. This is why an order for special damages is awarded on actual proof of loss evidenced by receipts and the proof is usually required to be strict. See Elf v. Sillo (1994) 6 N.W.L.R. (Pt. 350) 258." - Per Omage, J.C.A. in Unipetrol (Nig.) Plc. v. Buraimoh Suit No. CA/I/241/2001; (2004) 15 N.W.L.R. (Pt. 897) 641 at 660 - 661.

(4) "Learned counsel for the respondent argued the issue of award of general damages under his second issue. He submitted that the award was proper. The considerations taken by the learned trial Judge were not irrelevant. The amount awarded was neither inordinately low not inordinately high. The respect the respondent gave to the appellant was high having regard to his status in the society. The respondent by that had been made to suffer unnecessary loss and embarrassment, which could only be compensated by award of adequate damages in favour of the respondent. The respondent did not get double compensation from the award of specific amount claimed and the award of general damages. This appeal, learned counsel argued, is not in pari material with the F.C.E. v. Anyanwu (supra) cited by the appellant. It is further submitted for the respondent that an appellate Court shall not disturb the award of damages by trial Court, moreso when the learned trial Judge based his award of general damages on his findings of fact. The award of the general damages by the trial Court is not vitiated by any circumstances in the exceptions U.T.B. (Nig.) Ltd. v. Ozoemena (2001) 7 N.W.L.R. (Pt. 713) 718. This issue calls for the consideration of the general principles governing the grant of damages. Permit me to repeat what I said my Lords, in the case of Adodo v. Ismaila (1998) 11 N.W.L.R. (Pt. 573) 214 at page 224-225 paragraphs H-B: "Let me quickly and briefly mention that the word "damages" means the pecuniary compensation obtained by a successful party in an action for a wrong which is either a tort or a breach of contract. ‘General damages’ have been defined as damages such as the law will presume to be the direct natural or probable consequences of the act complained of whereas ‘special damages’ are such damages as the law will not infer from the nature of the act complained of. They are exceptional character wise and must be specifically pleaded and strictly proved. The difference between the two types of damages is that whereas in the former case the Court can make an award when it cannot point out any measure of assessment except what it can hold in the opinion of a reasonable man. In the latter case, all the losses claimed on every item must have crystallized in terms and value before trial. Akinfonle v....