CIVIL PROCEDURE — Damages — General Principles — Appellate Court’s Power to Interfere
Principle Statement
In order to interfere or justify the interfering with any decision of a trial judge on the amount or quantum of damages awarded or awardable; the Appellate court has to be convinced either, (a) that the judge acted upon some wrong principles of law or (b) that the amount awarded, was so extremely high or very low or small as to make it an entirely erroneous estimate of the damage to which the plaintiff is entitled.
Ratio Decidendi (Source)
Per Ogbuagu, JSC, in Oduwole & Ors v. West (2010) NLC-123-173-2003(SC) at p. 17; Paras A-C.
"In order to interfere or justify the interfering with any decision of a trial judge on the amount or quantum of damages awarded or awardable; the Appellate court has to be convinced either, (a) that the judge acted upon some wrong principles of law or (b) that the amount awarded, was so extremely high or very low or small as to make it an entirely erroneous estimate of the damage to which the plaintiff is entitled."
Explanation / Scope
This principle establishes the two grounds for appellate interference with quantum of damages: wrong principle of law or amount so extremely high or low as to be an erroneous estimate. The principle applies where damages are challenged. It ensures that appellate courts respect trial court discretion. The principle reflects the limited scope of appellate review. It prevents interference based on mere disagreement. The court must find an exception. The principle provides guidance on appellate review of damages.
