DAMAGES AND REMEDIES ā Special Damages ā Strict Proof ā Unchallenged Evidence Not Automatically Sufficient
Principle Statement
Failure of the defendant to challenge the items claimed does not lessen the requirement of the strict proof on the plaintiff. ā¦ The mere fact that the evidence is not challenged is not enough. Where a person claims an item of special damages the law requires him to prove the damage strictly and not leave the Court to guess or speculate.
Ratio Decidendi (Source)
Per Musdapher, JSC, in Adim v. NBC Plc & Anor (2010) NLC-123-56-2003(SC) at pp. 5ā6; Paras EāA.
"Failure of the defendant to challenge the items claimed does not lessen the requirement of the strict proof on the plaintiff. ā¦ The mere fact that the evidence is not challenged is not enough. Where a person claims an item of special damages the law requires him to prove the damage strictly and not leave the Court to guess or speculate."
Explanation / Scope
This principle establishes that unchallenged evidence does not automatically satisfy the strict proof requirement for special damages; the plaintiff must still strictly prove the claim. The principle applies where special damages are claimed. It ensures that the plaintiff meets the burden. The principle reflects that strict proof is required regardless of challenge. It prevents courts from speculating. The court must require strict proof. The principle provides guidance on the effect of unchallenged evidence in special damages claims.
