Having made this clarification; I agree, in principle, that where a party to an action has proved his substantive claim there would be no justification to embark on the consideration of his alternative claim, and that alternative claims are considered and granted where the grant of the substantive claim is either not feasible, unjust, or inequitable
Karaye v. Wike LGC(21/6/2019) F
I will add quickly as this is also settled, that there is nothing wrong in a plaintiff or party in an action, to include in his pleadings, two or more inconsistent sets of material facts and claim reliefs thereunder, in the alternative. In other words, it cannot be disputed that either party to a suit may, in a proper case, include in his pleadings, alternative and inconsistent allegations of material facts, as or so long as he does so separately and distinctly. A plaintiff is thus entitled to plead two or more inconsistent sets of material facts and claim relief in the alternative thereunder. He may also rely on several different rights alternatively although they may be inconsistent.
In other words again, an alternative award, is an award that can be made instead of another. It is a separate claim and a separate award. It is not an additional award otherwise, it would amount to double compensation which must be avoided.