Judiciary-Poetry-Logo
JPoetry

A PARTY WHO CLAIMS FOR COMPENSATION HAS TO LEAD EVIDENCE TO PROOF SAME

Reach more audience. Place advert here.

Dictum

The law is that, issue of payment of compensation is a serious matter. It is always a head claim of its own. A party who claims for compensation has to lead evidence to prove same before a Court can decide whether to grant or not. No Court is allowed to award compensation to a party just for the asking as the Court is not a Father Christmas. In the English case of Greif (UK) Ltd & Anor. v Sienkiewicz (Administratix of Estate of Enid Costello Deceased) & Anor [2011] LPELR – 17792 (UKSC), the Supreme Court of England said: “It is a basic principle of the law of tort that Claimant will only have cause of action if he can prove on balance of probabilities, that the defendant’s tortious conduct caused the damage in respect of which compensation is claimed. He must show that, but not for the defendant’s tortious conduct, he would not have suffered the damage…”

— O. Oyewumi, J. Aseidu v Japaul (2019) – NICN/AK/01/2016

Was this dictum helpful?

SHARE ON

COMPENSATION IS TO BE MADE TO THE NIGERIA SOCIAL INSURANCE TRUST FUND

Having determined that the Claimant’s injury was sustained in the course “of his employment with the Defendant falls clearly within the contemplation of the new Employee’s Compensation Act and thus the Claimant is entitled to requisite compensation.” Now by section 2(2) of the Employee’s Compensation Act 2010, the implementation of the Act and the Fund established under section 56 is vested in the Nigeria Social Insurance Trust Fund Management Board. It is to this Board that a deserving employee must apply for compensation. It is when the employee is dissatisfied with the decision of the Board that an appeal shall lie to this Court under section 55(4) of the Act. In addition to this the Defendant is expected under this law to be credited monthly all moneys, funds or contributions by employers for adequate compensation to employees or their dependents for any death, injury, disability or disease etc. Section 56. See also Section 33 also. There is nothing before the court to indicate that any of the pre conditions to evoking the provisions of the Employers Compensations Act have been complied with.

— E.N. Agbakoba, J. Igenoza v Unknown Defendant (2019) – NICN/ABJ/294/2014

Was this dictum helpful?

TO CLAIM MONETARY COMPENSATION, APPLICANT MUST SHOW LOSS OR DAMAGES SUFFERED

“99. In this instant where the Applicant has sought monetary compensation for the violation of its rights in the sum of N500,000,000 (Five Hundred Million Naira) for exemplary and aggravated damages the Court will therefore consider whether it is entitled to the relief based on proof. Whilst an act may be declared to be in contravention of guarantees within the ACHPR and therefore a violation of the rights enshrined therein, a claimant must show cause as to how loss or damage resulted from same. 100. Taking cognizance of the facts and evidence, the Court notes the affidavit sworn to by Chief Malcolm Emokiniovo Omirhobo stating that he was denied access to his Twitter account for which he is seeking that the Court orders for damages. However, the Applicant has failed to submit evidence of proof of the actual harm suffered from the ban on Twitter. The Court notes also, that a list of persons was adduced without details as to the actual loss or damage that resulted from the violation of the rights enshrined in Article 9 of the ACHPR. It is on this basis that the Court dismisses the claim for monetary compensation by the Applicant as the same has not been properly established before this Court.”

— SERAP v FRN (2022) – ECW/CCJ/JUD/40/22

Was this dictum helpful?

Click the icons to like, follow, and join JPoetry

Facebook Twitter Whatsapp Telegram

Humongouz Empire

© 2025

designed by Humongouz Ztudio. 

TO – 718 | UO – 0 | GO – 625 | BO – 93

External link(s)

BOOK: First 2-years as a Law Student: Experiences and Lessons.