APPELLATE COURT WILL NOT INTERFERE WITH AN AWARD OF DAMAGES AWARDED

The law is settled that an appellate Court will not ordinarily interfere with an award of damages made by a trial Court unless it is shown that in the assessment and award of damages, the trial Court applied a wrong principle of law or misapprehended the facts or that the award is so high or...

Membership Required

You must be a member to access this content.

View Membership Levels

Already a member? Log in here

AWARD OF DAMAGES IS DUTY OF TRIAL COURT – WHERE SUCH WILL BE INTERFERED IN

I have to commence my reasoning in this issue by laying emphasis on the notorious fact that the award of damages is essentially the duty of a trial court and will not be interfered with except unless certain circumstances exist:- a. Where the trial court acted under a misapprehension of facts or law b. where...

Membership Required

You must be a member to access this content.

View Membership Levels

Already a member? Log in here

TORT OF NEGLIGENCE AND THE ISSUE OF DAMAGES

The tort of negligence is a civil wrong consisting of breach of a legal duty to care which results in damage. Thus, three things must be proved before the liability to pay damages for tort of negligence and these are:- (a) That the defendant owned the plaintiff a duty to exercise due care. (b) That...

Membership Required

You must be a member to access this content.

View Membership Levels

Already a member? Log in here

SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE DISTINGUISHED FROM DAMAGES

To sue for specific performance is to assume that a contract is still subsisting and therefore to insist that it should be performed. That will mean that the plaintiff will not want it repudiated unless for any other reason the court was unable to aid him to enforce specific performance of it. He may then...

Membership Required

You must be a member to access this content.

View Membership Levels

Already a member? Log in here

ASSESSMENT OF DAMAGES IN BREACH OF CONTRACT

[A]s far back as 1854 in the case of Hadley v. Baxendale (1854) 9 Ex (Ch. 341, where at p. 354 of the Report, Alderson, B. expressed the law as follows: “Now we think the proper rule in such a case as the present is this: Where two parties have made a contract which one of them has broken, the damages which the other party ought to receive in respect of such a breach of contract should be such as may fairly and reasonably be considered either arising naturally, according to the usual course of things, from such breach of contract itself, or such as may reasonably be supposed to have been in the contemplation of both parties, at the time they made the contract, as the probable result of the breach of it.”

Was this dictum helpful?

INSTANCES WHEN APPEAL COURT WILL INTERFERE WITH DAMAGES GRANTED BY TRIAL COURT

The appellant’s learned senior counsel had submitted that it had shown reasons for this Court to interfere with the award of damages. An appellate Court does not usually interfere with award of damages unless: (a) the trial Court acted under a mistake of law; or (b) where the trial Court acted in disregard of some...

Membership Required

You must be a member to access this content.

View Membership Levels

Already a member? Log in here

DAMAGES FOR PAIN (WHICH CANNOT BE MEASURED) SHOULD NOT BE DENIED

Reach more audience. Place advert here.

Was this dictum helpful?

APPELLATE COURT WILL NOT INTERFERE WITH AN AWARD OF DAMAGES AWARDED

Membership Required

AWARD OF DAMAGES IS DUTY OF TRIAL COURT – WHERE SUCH WILL BE INTERFERED IN

Membership Required

TORT OF NEGLIGENCE AND THE ISSUE OF DAMAGES

Membership Required

SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE DISTINGUISHED FROM DAMAGES

Membership Required

ASSESSMENT OF DAMAGES IN BREACH OF CONTRACT

Was this dictum helpful?

INSTANCES WHEN APPEAL COURT WILL INTERFERE WITH DAMAGES GRANTED BY TRIAL COURT

Membership Required