University of Ibadan V. Omoniyi Wickliffe & Ors. (2006)

LawGlobal-Hub Lead Judgment Report

AMINA ADAMU AUGIE, J.C.A.

 The 1st – 5th Respondents were students who took part in the 1993/1994 University Matriculation Examinations (UME) conducted by the 6th Respondent on the 8th of May 1993. They were offered provisional admission into the Appellant University, which they accepted and after paying the necessary fees, they were registered as students by the Appellant. Three months later, however, the Appellant cancelled their provisional admissions pursuant to a directive of the 6th Respondent, in a letter dated 31/5/94, which reads –

“As a result of our routine checks of the particulars of candidates so far offered provisional admission by your University, the candidates listed on the attached list were involved in tampering with their examination particulars. The Board would like to request that all the candidates listed on the attached list should not be registered. Any admission letters they may possess have been declared void’~ (Italics mine)

In reaction, the 1st- 5th Respondents filed an action against the Appellant and 6th Respondent at the Federal High Court, Ibadan, claiming as follows –

(a) A Declaration that the Plaintiffs did not tamper with any examination particulars at the 1993/1994 University Matriculation Examination.

(b) A Declaration that the purported cancellation of the Plaintiffs’ result and admission at the 1993/1994 University Matriculation Examination by the Defendants is unwarranted, unlawful, unconstitutional and ultra vires the Defendants.

(c) An order restraining the Defendants, their agents, or servants from interfering with the registration, matriculation and studies of the Plaintiffs.

(d) N2,000.000.00 (Two Million Naira) to each of the Plaintiffs being special and general damages for the injury occasioned by the Negligence, ineptitude and recklessness of the Defendants.

At the end of the trial that ensued, and after hearing address of counsel, the learned trial Judge, Soba, J., delivered his Judgment on the 14th of February 2001, wherein he granted prayers (a), (b), & (c) in favour of the 1st – 5th Respondents, and in awarding N500,000.00 as damages, held as follow –

“..The Plaintiffs’ claim is predicated in negligence on the part of the Defendants. However the plaintiffs have failed to comply with the principle in A.N.T.S. v. ATOLOYE (supra) that unless the Particulars of negligence has been pleaded no evidence shall be allowed to show the alleged negligence of duty the Defendants owed to the Plaintiffs. Consequently, the claim of damages for negligence is not proved. It is true that the Plaintiffs in their oral evidence, each of them told the Court that they were shocked, sad, and were embarrassed when they learnt about the cancellation of their results and admission to the University. I hold that the Plaintiffs are entitled to general damages for non-pecuniary loss in that the shock is an element of pain and suffering and the sickness and embarrassment are matters of inconvenience and discomfort for which the Plaintiffs are entitled to compensation. General damages are losses which naturally flow from the Defendant and its quantum need not be pleaded or proved as it is generally presumed by law. Considering the natural and probable consequences of cancellation of the Plaintiff’s notification of results and the withdrawal of their admission letters to the Universities concerned at the time it was done and in the circumstances reminiscence in the case of JARVIS v. SWAN TOURS LTD. (1973) 1 O. B. 233. Accordingly-

I hereby award the sum of N500,000.00 damages and N50,000.00 cost in favour of the aforementioned Plaintiffs against the Defendants Jointly and severally” (Italics mine)

Dissatisfied with the decision on damages, the Appellant’s appeal to this Court is against the award of damages only. Briefs of arguments were duly filed, and in the Appellant’s Brief prepared by Oladepo Abiodun, Esq., it was submitted that the sole issue for determination in this appeal is as follows –

“Whether from the facts and the weight of evidence adduced in this case, the trial Judge was right in holding that the Plaintiffs were entitled to damages, special and or general, for non-pecuniary loss and awarding the sum of N500,000.00 (Five hundred thousand Naira) as general damages after finding that the Plaintiff’s claim for special and general damages was not proved”.

It is the Appellant’s contention that there is no personal injury or wrong that accrues from its action to the 1st – 5th Respondents to warrant the award of N500, 000.00 general damages against it and it was merely carrying out its statutory duty of obeying the directive of the 6th Respondent requesting it to stop the registration of all candidates involved in examination irregularities; that the findings of the lower Court, which it said entitled the 1st – 5th Respondents to general damages for non pecuniary loss, are not foreseeable and too remote to found a claim in damages, citing Shell Pet. Dev. Co. (Nig.) Ltd. V. Tiebo VIII (1996) 4 NWLR (pt. 445) 657; and that notwithstanding its finding that the claim for negligence was not proved, the lower Court went ahead to hold that the said Respondents are entitled to damages for non-pecuniary loss and awarded N500, 000.00 as damages. This Court was urged to hold that the said award has no basis in law since the said Respondents failed to plead or prove negligence on their part.