Remedies Flashcards

1
Q

What case is an example of remoteness of damage?

A

Hadley v Baxendale (1854)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Hadley v Baxendale (1854)

A

A shaft broke in a mill. The owner ordered a new mill shaft and contracted with a carrier to deliver the new shaft. Importantly the carrier did not know that the mill owner did not have a spare shaft. The carrier was late with the delivery of the shaft, and the owner was unable to use the mill without the shaft. The owner sued the carrier, claiming for loss of profits because the delivery was later. It was held that the damages could arise from the losses reasonably anticipated by the parties at the time of entering the contract or from the parties’ specific knowledge of the potential losses. The carriers were not liable because they were not aware of the importance of the delivery.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

What case is an example of usual damage and special damage?

A

Victoria Laundry v newman Industries (1949)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Victoria Laundry v newman Industries (1949)

A

The defendants agreed to sell a second-hand boiler to the claimants, a company of laundered and dyers. At the time of the contract the defendants knew the claimants wanted the boiler for immediate use. The defendants breached the contract by delivering the boiler 20 weeks late. The claimants claims £16 a week, representing the increased ordinary profit which they could have made with the boiler.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

What case is an example of quantum of damages - the loss must be financially quantifiable?

A

Huxley Electronics & Construction Ltd v Forsyth (1995)
Jarvis v Swan Tours (1973)
Farley v Skinner (No. 2) (2001)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Huxley Electronics & Construction Ltd v Forsyth (1995)

A

The defendant agreed to build a swimming pool for the claimant’s garden. The contract stated the pool should be 7 feet and 6 inches at its maximum depth. When the work was completed it was found the depth was 6 feet 9 inches. The trial judge awarded the defendant damages of £2,500 for loss of amenity. The court of appeal awarded the defendant £21,560 for damages. The claimants appealed and it was held the defendant’s damages should not be the cost of re-digging the swimming pool to make it conform to the contract specifications. It would be unreasonable for the defendant to insist on this and out of all proportion to the benefit which he would obtain. The defendant was therefore only entitled to damages for the difference in value between the pool as it was and the pool as it ought to have been. The trial judge’s award of £2,500 was restored.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Jarvis v Swan Tours (1973)

A

The claimant was able to claim for mental distress. The claimant booked a skiing holiday and was promised various facilities. The facilities turned out to be inferior to those advertised. The claimant sued for breach of contract. The Court of Appeal decided that Jarvis was entitled to recover not just financial loss suffered but also damages for loss of entertainment and enjoyment.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Farley v Skinner (No. 2) (2001)

A

A surveyor was employed by a potential house pur­chaser to survey a house and particularly to find out if there were any problems with aircraft noise. The surveyor stated there were no problems with aircraft noise. In fact there was. The noise of the aircraft materially affected the use and enjoyment of the house. Relying on the survey, the potential purchaser bought the house. The claimant was entitled to £10,000 since the surveyor’s report was incorrect.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

What case is an example of Quantum of damages - agreed damages will not be altered, but penalty sums will not be enforced?

A

Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre Co Ltd v New Garage Motor Co (1915)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre Co Ltd v New Garage Motor Co (1915)

A

Dunlop, manufactured tyres and distributed them to retailers for resale. The contract between Dunlop and New Garage contained a clause preventing New Garage from selling the tyres below list price. In the event that they were in breach the contract specified that a sum of £5 would be payable for each tyre sold below the list price. The defendants sold some tyres below the list price and the claimant brought an action for damages based on the amount specified in the contract. The defendant argued that the relevant clause was a penalty clause and thus unenforceable. It was held the clause was a liquidated damages clause, not a penalty clause. £5 was quite a lot of money in 1915 but it was taken as a genuine attempt to assess damages.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

What case is an example of Quantum of damages - the injured party has a duty to mitigate any loss

A

Brace v Calder (1895)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Brace v Calder (1895)

A

The claimant was an employee of a partnership on a fixed term contract. The partnership dissolved and the claimant lost his job. A new partnership was formed and the claimant was offered his job back on his old terms of employment. The claimant refused and claimed the wages lost due to early termination of his fixed-term contract. It was held that a breach of contract had occurred but the claimant should have mitigated his loss by accepting the offer of alternative employment. He was therefore only entitled to nominal damages.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

What cases are examples of injunctions?

A

Page One Records Ltd v Britton (1968)
Warner Bros v Nelson (1936)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

Page One Records Ltd v Britton (1968)

A

A pop group, the Troggs, made a written agreement with their manager. The agreement provided that he should be the group’s manager for a five-year period, and that the group would not appoint anyone else as manager. Shortly afterwards the Troggs wanted to replace him. The manager asked for an injunction to prevent the Troggs from employing anyone else as their manager. This injunction could not be granted as this would force them to having to continue employing the manager

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Warner Bros v Nelson (1936)

A

The film star, Bette Davis, contracted with Warner Bros not to act on stage or screen for anyone other than Warner Bros for a year. Bette Davis breached the contract and entered into a contract with a UK company to star in a film. Warner Bros were awarded an injunction to prevent her working for the UK company. They would not be granted specific performance to force her to work for them, but could have an injunction to prevent her working for a UK film company.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly