Intentional Damage Is Never Too Remote

The general rule of law is that a tort teaser is
usually liable for his intentional tort.
Thus, intentional harm or mischief is an actionable tort, and whether the act is malicious, innocent, or intended as a joke and so forth is irrelevant. Accordingly, intended, intentional or malicious damage or harm is never too remote and will be compensated, so long as the damage is foreseeable. Furthermore, the extent or magnitude of the damage need not be foreseeable by the reasonable man for it to be compensated.
Similarly, if A negligently knocks B down and unfortunately great injury is inflicted because as it is later discovered, B is unhealthy, prone to injury or has a thin skull or eggshell, A will not be excused by saying uiat if B had been normal person injury would not have resulted. Similarly, if D gives E a light blow which expectedly should only bruise E, but because E has a “thin skull” or “eggshell” and he dies, the law will regard D as liable for E’s death. This rule apples to all persons who tend to bleed severely as a result of the inability of the blood to clot easily. This principle is called the “unusual plaintiff” rule.
Scott V Shepherd:
At a market fair at Milbourne Port, England, the defendant Shepherd, threw a lighted Squib, “fire work” on the stall of one Yates, the Willis in order to protect the goods of Yates, threw it away. It landed on the stall of Ryal who in turn threw it on. It hit Scott, the Plaintiff in the face, exploded and blinded one of his eyes, Scott sued for damages, Iteld that Shepherd was liable for Scott for injures because he intended mischief or injury by throwing it at a shop. There was no break in the chain of cause. Shepherd should have expected that Willis and Ryal would react as they did. Intentional harm is never too remote. The chain of events by which the damage occurred to the Plaintiff need not be foreseeable. It is sufficient that the defendant intended mischief or injury, and injury is reasonable foreseeable when he threw a firework at a trade  fair.
A Tort teasor Takes His Victim As He Finds Him
This principle of liability is also known as the “eggshell” rule, “thin skull” rule.
Plaintiffs” rule. Under the egg shell principle, a tort teasor “takes his victim as he finds him.”
In no other words, a tort teaser is bound to accept his victim as he is.  If the victim is prone to injury, ill, or weak heart and just one light blow will kill him of inflict permanent incapacity on the victim. It is unfortunately too bad for the fort teaser, who never the less has to bear the consequences of his fort. The general rule of law is that a person is taken as intending the natural consequence of his action. This principle of liability is an exception to the rule of reasonable foreseeability under the thin skull rule-a defendant cannot plead the medical condition makes the loss unexpected, unreasonable, or not reasonably foreseeable.

Chidi Enyie