Remedies - Types of losses or damages Flashcards
(12 cards)
Robinson v Harman [1848]
goal of expectation damages
Damages for breach of contract compensate for expectation loss
Parsons v Uttley Ingham [1978]
loss of pigs; consequential losses; specific illness need not be foreseeable
The exact extent of loss need not be reasonably foreseeable, any extent of loss is recoverable if it is of the same type as what was reasonably foreseeable
The majority decided that there should be no distinction between the types of loss in contractual damages, with Lord Denning MR differing on this point
Mertens v Home Freeholds [1921]
building contracts: cost of cure
◦ measure of damages in a building case like this =
▪ what it costs C to complete the house substantially as it was originally intended, and in a reasonable manner, less any amount that C would have had to pay D under teh contract if D performed correctly
◦ not the same as the difference between the market price of what the plaintiff ought to have got and did get
Radford v de Froberville [1977]
measure of expectation damages
Cost of cure (also referred to as cost of reinstatement) can be awarded as measure of damages for breach of contract.
Tito v Waddell (no 2) [1977]
island denuded; diminution in value
Self dealing is a sale of property by a fiduciary to him or herself. Fair dealing is a form of self dealing where no advantage is taken, full disclosure is made and the transaction is fair and honest
Where there has been self-dealing by a fiduciary, this renders the transaction voidable and the principal is entitled to rescind it, however fair the transaction is
Where there has been a fair-dealing by a fiduciary, the transaction is not voidable as of right and the principal cannot rescind it if the trustee has acted fairly
Attorney-General v Blake [2001]
disgorgement
Restitution of profits made in breach of contract can be awarded where there is legitimate interest in preventing the profit-making activity.
Disgorgement refers to the act of returning money or profits obtained through illegal or unethical means
Wrotham Park Estate Co Ltd v Parkside Homes Ltd [1974]
negotiating damages
This case established that ‘negotiating damages’ can be awarded to claimants for the hypothetical amount that he could have reasonably demanded for the contractual provision that was breached to be waived.
One Step (Support) Ltd v Morris-Garner [2018]
negotiating damages
- Negotiating damages are only available where the contractual right that was breached can be properly viewed as an asset
- Negotiating damages are compensatory and not restitutionary in nature
- Non-compete and non-solicitation covenants are not ‘assets’ and thus their breach cannot be compensated by negotiating damages
Anglia Television Ltd v Reed [1972]
television production; reliance damages
- Lord Denning MR sought to establish a principle that reliance interest can be an alternative measure of damages in contract law to expectation interest, but this was rejected in The Mamola Challenger.
- Whilst damages generally seek to put the parties in the position they would have been in had the contract been performed, the parties may elect to claim reliance loss and recover expenses incurred in an abortive transaction
CCC Films (London) Ltd v Impact Quadrant Films [1985]
reliance damages
The innocent party to a breach of contract has absolute discretion to choose whether to sue for ordinary damages or wasted expenditure. This means that they can sue for wasted expenditure in cases where they cannot prove any other loss.
C & P Haulage v Middleton [1983]
reliance losses but expenditure would have been wasted anyway
Damages for breach of contract should not put the claimant in a better financial position than if the contract had been properly performed
Omak Maritime Ltd v Mamola Challenger Shipping Co Ltd (The Mamola Challenger) [2010]
reliance damages as expectation damages
In contract law, damages for reliance loss is a species of damages for expectation loss.
reliance damages are capped by reference to the value of the bargain
reliance measure does not aim to put the party in the position that they would be in if the contract were never made; it is the best approximation in the circumstances of putting them in the position that they would be in if it were performed
