23. Damages

Contract Law ◽  
2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ewan McKendrick
Keyword(s):  
Mental Distress ◽  
General Rule ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Breach Of Contract ◽  
Section 8 ◽  
Contributory Negligence ◽  
Interest Section

This chapter examines the entitlement of a claimant to recover damages in respect of a breach of contract committed by the defendant, and is organized as follows. Section 2 discusses the different measures of damages that can be awarded, while Section 3 analyses the performance interest. Section 4 examines the circumstances in which a claimant can seek damages based on his ‘reliance’ losses rather than his performance interest, while Section 5 discusses the circumstances in which damages may be awarded to protect the claimant’s ‘restitution’ interest. Section 6 examines the entitlement of a claimant to recover damages in respect of non-pecuniary losses, particularly ‘mental distress’. Section 7 considers the general rule that damages are assessed as at the date of breach and the exceptions to that rule, while Section 8 considers the various doctrines which the courts use in order to keep liability within acceptable bounds. These include remoteness, mitigation, and contributory negligence. Section 9 examines the circumstances in which a defendant can be ordered to account to a claimant for the profits that he has made from his breach of contract. Section 10 looks at the possibility that exemplary damages might play a role in breach of contract cases. The chapter concludes, in Sections 11 and 12, with a discussion of agreed damages clauses (and related clauses) and their legal regulation.

23. Damages

Contract Law ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 791-900
Author(s):  
Ewan McKendrick
Keyword(s):  
Mental Distress ◽  
General Rule ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Breach Of Contract ◽  
Section 8 ◽  
Contributory Negligence ◽  
Interest Section

This chapter examines the entitlement of a claimant to recover damages in respect of a breach of contract committed by the defendant, and is organized as follows. Section 2 discusses the different measures of damages that can be awarded, while Section 3 analyses the performance interest. Section 4 examines the circumstances in which a claimant can seek damages based on his ‘reliance’ losses rather than his performance interest, while Section 5 discusses the circumstances in which damages may be awarded to protect the claimant’s ‘restitution’ interest. Section 6 examines the entitlement of a claimant to recover damages in respect of non-pecuniary losses, particularly ‘mental distress’. Section 7 considers the general rule that damages are assessed as at the date of breach and the exceptions to that rule, while Section 8 considers the various doctrines which the courts use in order to keep liability within acceptable bounds. These include remoteness, mitigation, and contributory negligence. Section 9 examines the circumstances in which a claimant can recover what is known as ‘negotiating damages’ or the defendant can be ordered to account to a claimant for the profits that he has made from his breach of contract. Section 10 looks at the possibility that exemplary damages might play a role in breach of contract cases. The chapter concludes, in Sections 11 and 12, with a discussion of agreed damages clauses (and related clauses) and their legal regulation.

Form of compensatory damages, date for assessment, taxation

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew Burrows
Keyword(s):  
General Rule ◽  
Breach Of Contract ◽  
Lump Sum ◽  
Future Loss ◽  
Compensatory Damages ◽  
Assault And Battery

The general rule can be expressed as follows: a court must assess in a lump sum all past, present, and future loss resulting from the particular tort or breach of contract being sued for, because no damages can be later given for a cause of action on which judgment has already been given. The classic authority is Fitter v Veal, where the claimant had been awarded £11 damages against the defendant in an action for assault and battery. His injuries proved to be more serious than at first thought and he had to undergo an operation on his skull. It was held that he could not recover for this further loss in a new action.

21. Remedies for Breach of Contract

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
M P Furmston
Keyword(s):  
Breach Of Contract ◽  
Time Limits ◽  
Contributory Negligence ◽  
Liquidated Damages ◽  
Specific Performance

This chapter discusses remedies for breach of contract. It covers damages (remoteness of damage and measure of damages; mitigation; contributory negligence; liquidated damages and penalties; and deposits, part payments, and forfeitures), specific performance (specific performance a discretionary remedy; the principle of mutuality; and the remedy of injunction), and extinction of remedies (the statutory time limits; effect of defendant’s fraud; extension of time in case of disability; effect of acknowledgement or part payment; and effect of lapse of time on equitable claims).

16. Remedies I: compensatory damages

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Janet O’Sullivan
Keyword(s):  
Financial Loss ◽  
Breach Of Contract ◽  
The Core ◽  
Contributory Negligence ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Compensatory Damages

Titles in the Core Text series take the reader straight to the heart of the subject, providing focused, concise, and reliable guides for students at all levels. This chapter focuses on compensatory damages, the principal remedy for breach of contract, and explores the actionable types of loss. It deals with the various measures of damages, how they are quantified, and discusses the circumstances in which the claimant can recover for non-financial loss. It explores principles of causation and the remoteness of damage test for breach of contract, the requirement of mitigation and the defence of contributory negligence.

scholarly journals Legal Regulation of International Commercial Electronic Contracts. Technological and Legal Aspects of Electronic Signature

Lex Russica ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 115-126
Author(s):  
D. A. Lovtsov ◽  
L. V. Terenteva
Keyword(s):  
General Rule ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Legal Aspects ◽  
International Standards ◽  
Vienna Convention ◽  
Electronic Communications ◽  
Electronic Signature ◽  
Electronic Signatures ◽  
Cross Border ◽  
Electronic Form

In the modern realities of converting document flow to the digital plane, the issues of validity of contracts concluded in electronic form, as well as the conditions for recognizing an electronic signature, are of particular importance. In this regard, the authors turn to the study of the provisions of the United Nations Convention on the Use of Electronic Communications in International Contracts of 2005, as well as other international trade agreements to clarify their applicability to cross-border contracts concluded in electronic form.In the paper, the authors raise the question of the validity of an electronic cross-border transaction that falls under the regulation of the Vienna Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods of 1980, the USSR reservation to which on the inadmissibility of concluding a contract not in writing, but in any form, continues to apply. In this regard, the authors explore the possibility of interpreting article 13 of the 1980 Vienna Convention containing the definition of the "written form", outside of the general rule of interpretation of the provisions of the 1980 Vienna Convention provided for in article 7.Based on the comparative analysis of national and international legal norms, norms of soft law regulating electronic documents, the authors reveal a number of problems arising from the lack of specificity of the mechanism of recognition of foreign electronic signatures in Russia and put forward proposals for their solution. To this end, the authors explore the possibilities of developing international standards for the compatibility of technological algorithms for electronic digital signatures using an asymmetric scheme, based on which foreign certificates of electronic signature keys can be recognized. 

scholarly journals Legal Regulation Of Private Law Aspects Of Water Use By Owners And Users Of Neighboring Land

2019 ◽  
pp. 132-144
Author(s):  
I.V. Myronenko
Keyword(s):  
Water Resources ◽  
Water Use ◽  
General Rule ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Legal Documents ◽  
Land Owners ◽  
Foreign Countries ◽  
Natural Movement ◽  
Legitimate Interests ◽  
The Republic

The article is devoted to some questions of the legal legal regulation of neighborhood relations related to the use of water to meet the needs of owners and users of neighboring land. The regulation of this relationship has historically been an inseparable part of neighbour law. Regulations of this kind were contained in many historically significant Ukrainian legal documents (in particular, various editions of the Lithuanian Statutes, the Rights of the Little Russian People (1743), and others). Currently, the regulation of the use of water resources mainly comes under the sphere of public law. Consequently, the current Land Code of Ukraine does not contain regulations of this kind. Nevertheless, a study of international legislation and regulation policies on neighbourly relations emphasizes the necessity to legislate on the private aspects of neighbourly water use. In particular, such provisions include the laws of the Republic of Moldova, Georgia, Republic of Azerbaijan and some other post-soviet states. The findings of the study has made it possible to formulate the proposals aimed at improving the current legislation on this issue. They are based on a general rule forbidding to alter the natural movement (flow) of water, if it violates the rights and legitimate interests of owners or land users of neighboring land. The artificial movement (flow) of water, caused by the activity of land owners or land users, is proposed to regulate by contract by establishing land easements (discharge of water to a neighboring land plot, their redistribution between neighbors, etc.). Regulating water-related relationships to meet the needs of owners or land users of neighboring land has historically been an integral part of «neighborhood law». Nowadays, the legal regulation of the relationship regarding the use of water resources has shifted to the sphere of public legal regulation. Nevertheless, the study of the laws of foreign countries and the practice of regulating good neighborly relations indicate the need for legal regulation of private aspects of neighborhood water use. They are mainly related to the prohibition of altering the natural movement of water if it violates the rights and legitimate interests of owners and owners of neighboring properties.

The reason for treating personal injury claims separately is that they raise problems not encountered in actions for other types of loss. In an action for financial loss, monetary compensation is adequate. Similarly, physical damage to property can be compensated by a monetary payment equivalent to the market value of the property damaged. But, where a person loses a leg or suffers pain, money is the only compensation available, but the market value of a leg or pain is impossible to ascertain. The concentration of English law on property rights appears to be to blame for this. As far as possible, the courts have treated personal injuries as depriving a person of a property right, but this approach is difficult to justify in relation to subjective losses, such as pain, suffering and mental distress. A particular variety of loss which creates difficulty of assessment of damage is that of mental distress. Such distress can be caused in one of two ways. In the first place, it may be distress consequent on physical injury and, secondly, it may result from some cause quite separate from any form of physical harm. The first of these two is readily dealt with as a variety of consequential loss, and provided it is not too remote it should be recoverable. The second variety is more problematic, but it should not be believed that English law gives no remedy for mental distress. In the first place, just as in the law of tort, an action for damages for breach of contract will be allowed where it is foreseeable at the time of contracting that the claimant might suffer psychiatric harm. For example, in Cook v Swinfen, the respondent solicitors negligently handled a divorce action with the result that the appellant, their client, suffered from an anxiety neurosis. In the event, it was held, on the facts, that a breakdown in health was not a foreseeable consequence of the failed litigation, but the court, nonetheless accepted that had it been a foreseeable loss, it would have been actionable.

1995 ◽  
pp. 664-664
Keyword(s):  
Property Rights ◽  
Mental Distress ◽  
Market Value ◽  
Property Right ◽  
Personal Injury ◽  
Physical Injury ◽  
Financial Loss ◽  
Physical Damage ◽  
Breach Of Contract ◽  
English Law

7. Remedies for breach of contract

2021 ◽  
pp. 142-166
Author(s):  
Jill Poole ◽  
James Devenney ◽  
Adam Shaw-Mellors
Keyword(s):  
Breach Of Contract ◽  
Essential Information ◽  
Contributory Negligence ◽  
The Difference

Each Concentrate revision guide is packed with essential information, key cases, revision tips, exam Q&As, and more. Concentrates show you what to expect in a law exam, what examiners are looking for, and how to achieve extra marks. This chapter focuses on damages, the aim of which is generally to protect the claimant’s contractual expectation and put the claimant into the position they would have been in had the contract been properly performed. The lost expectation may be measured in terms of the difference between what the claimant expected to get and what was actually received. There are limitations on the claimant’s ability to be fully compensated for losses as a result of breach, i.e. remoteness, mitigation, contributory negligence, and the ability to recover for non-pecuniary losses in contract. This chapter also examines agreed damages clauses and the operation of the penalty rule.

17. Duress

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul S. Davies
Keyword(s):  
General Rule ◽  
Economic Interests ◽  
Breach Of Contract ◽  
Physical Integrity ◽  
Reasonable Alternative

Duress occurs when B exerts illegitimate pressure upon A to enter into a contract, leaving A with no reasonable practical alternative but to enter into that contract. Duress is founded upon a threat made by B to A, but there is no tort of duress. However, duress will render a contract voidable. This chapter considers the two principal forms of duress. The first is physical act duress, where A’s physical integrity is threatened. The second is economic duress, where A’s economic interests are threatened. Particularly in the context of economic duress, it is important that the threats caused A to enter into the agreement, and that A had no reasonable alternative but to succumb to the threat. As a general rule, any threatened breach of contract can constitute illegitimate pressure. In some instances, even a threat to carry out a lawful act may ground a claim in duress.

scholarly journals Statutes of Limitations on Bringing to Administrative Responsibility and the Procedure for their Calculation in the Context of Constitutional Law Principles

Lex Russica ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 32-43
Author(s):  
A. K. Subachev
Keyword(s):  
Russian Federation ◽  
General Rule ◽  
Legal Regulation ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Constitutional Principle ◽  
Special Procedure ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
One Year ◽  
Administrative Code ◽  
Administrative Responsibility

The initial version of the Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offences provided for a general statute of limitations (two months) and a special statute of limitations (one year from the date of the commission of an administrative offense) for administrative liability. As a result of multiple amendments to part 1 of Art. 4.5 of the Administrative Code of the Russian Federation, the special terms were increased to two, three and six years depending on the type of an administrative offense. In addition, initially part 4 of Art. 4.5 of the Administrative Code of the Russian Federation established a special procedure for calculating the statute of limitations for bringing to administrative responsibility in case of refusal to initiate criminal proceedings or dismissal of the case. The statute of limitation commenced from the date when the decision was made to refuse to initiate proceedings or to dismiss the case. Although the provision under consideration was later brought into line with the general rule, the legislator considered it necessary to supplement Art. 4.5 of the Administrative Code of the Russian Federation with parts 5.1, 6, 6.1 and 7, linking the beginning of the statute of limitations for administrative liability for certain administrative offenses with certain legal facts. As a result of the study, the author has revealed the discrepancy between the mentioned legislative innovations and the constitutional principle of proportionality of restrictions imposed by the legislator on the rights and freedoms and the principle of legal certainty. The author makes a proposal to improve the current legal regulation of the statute of limitations with regard to bringing to administrative responsibility and the procedure for their calculation.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document