EVIDENCE LAW — Special Damages — Proof of Ownership of Equipment — Necessity for Credible Evidence
Ratio Decidendi
Per Muhammad, JSC, in Arisons Trading & Engineering Company Ltd v. The Military Governor of Ogun State & Ors (2009) NLC-123-209-1999(SC) at p. 16; Paras A–C:
"If the appellant was to realize anything from the special damages claimed, it should have gone further to lead evidence on those who made inquiries to hire each item of the equipment/machinery. It should have also led evidence in proof of loss of interest from the capital which lay idle, depreciation and maintenance. Further, there was no evidence of how old or new the machinery or equipment were and whether they could really endure work for the 1248 days claimed."
Explanation / Scope
This principle establishes that proof of ownership and loss of use of equipment requires credible evidence. The plaintiff must lead evidence on inquiries for hire, loss of interest, depreciation, maintenance, and the condition of the equipment. The principle applies where special damages for loss of use are claimed. It ensures that claims are supported by detailed evidence. The principle reflects the need for strict proof. It prevents unsubstantiated claims for loss of use. The court must require evidence on each component of the claim. The principle provides guidance on the evidence required for such claims.