MAKING SENSE OF MESNE PROFITS: REMEDIES

This is the second of two articles about cases in which awards of “mesne profits” have been made against defendants who have occupied claimants’ land. The first article argues that the facts of cases where such awards have been made variously support claims in tort, contract or unjust enrichment and that practical consequences can flow from categorising the cases in one way or another. One is that different rules affect the assessment of remedies awarded to claimants depending on the claim that was made and the remedy that was awarded. The present article develops this point by examining the assessment principles governing “mesne profits” awards, according to whether these are classified as compensatory damages in tort, restitutionary damages in tort, orders that a defendant perform a contractual duty to pay a debt, compensatory damages for breach of contract, or orders that a defendant make restitution of an unjust enrichment.

English-6 The Concept of Tortuous Liability under Islamic Law: An Inquiry into Question of Compensatory Damages

Islam also provides the concept of tort which deals with civil rights of the people. It has not been codified yet, which leads judges to rely on interpretations and precedents in non-monetary damages cases such as mental torture, emotional distress, defamation and alike. Judges face more difficulties in assessing non-monetary damages and award of fair compensation. This paper discusses the issue of compensatory damages for non-monetary harms as allowed under Islamic law. The objective of this paper is to look for solutions by examining the principles of Islamic law regarding compensation for non-monetary damages and to fill in gaps in policy and law perspectives. It suggests a clearly written statute on non-monetary damages, by incorporating Islamic law principles, which cover all kinds of damages and can be used as guidelines for judges. To complete this study, a doctrinal, analytical and qualitative method of research has been followed.

Personalized Regulatory Techniques

This chapter expands the demonstration how personalized law would transform existing legal institutions. The chapter shifts the focus from specific doctrines to regulatory techniques. These are generic approaches to the design of legal interventions, used in every area of law. The chapter examines the personalization of several techniques: default rules, mandated disclosures, compensatory damages, and bundles of rights. With each of these tools, the law presently prescribes one-size-fits-all rules, designed to either best fit the average person, or to promote the interests of a specific subgroup of the population. By shifting to personalized rules, the law could simultaneously advance the interests of different groups and individuals. The chapter shows that designing personalized default rules, disclosures, damages, or bundles of rights would promote the goals underlying these interventions. Personalized default would mimic peoples’ preferences more successfully and reduce the incidence of opt-out. Personalized disclosures stand a chance of being more useful to people. Personalized compensation would come closer to making victims of wrongs whole. And personalized bundles of rights would recognize the diversity of people’s interests and aspirations.

11. Judicial Powers II

This chapter discusses the ‘decentralized’ powers of the European Court of Justice. It looks at two specific constitutional principles that the Court has derived from the general duty of sincere cooperation: the principle of equivalence and the principle of effectiveness. Both principles have led to a significant judicial harmonization of national procedural laws. The chapter then turns to a third incursion into the procedural autonomy of national courts: the liability principle. While the previous two principles relied on the existence of national remedies for the enforcement of European law, this principle establishes a European remedy for proceedings in national courts. An individual can here, under certain conditions, claim compensatory damages resulting from a breach of European law. Importantly, the remedial competence of national courts is confined to national wrongs. They cannot give judgments on ‘European’ wrongs, as jurisdiction over the latter is—like the power to annul Union law—an exclusive power of the Court of Justice of the European Union. Finally, the chapter explores what happens in areas in which the Union has harmonized the remedial or jurisdictional competences of national courts.

11. Judicial Powers II

This chapter discusses the ‘decentralized’ powers of the European Court of Justice. It looks at two specific constitutional principles that the Court has derived from the general duty of sincere cooperation: the principle of equivalence and the principle of effectiveness. Both principles have led to a significant judicial harmonization of national procedural laws. The chapter then turns to a third incursion into the procedural autonomy of national courts: the liability principle. While the previous two principles relied on the existence of national remedies for the enforcement of European law, this principle establishes a European remedy for proceedings in national courts. An individual can here, under certain conditions, claim compensatory damages resulting from a breach of European law. Importantly, the remedial competence of national courts is confined to national wrongs. They cannot give judgments on ‘European’ wrongs, as jurisdiction over the latter is—like the power to annul Union law—an exclusive power of the Court of Justice of the European Union. Finally, the chapter explores what happens in areas in which the Union has harmonized the remedial or jurisdictional competences of national courts.

Part VIII Remedies For Default, 28 Damages

The rules governing compensatory damages for breach of contract are complicated and at times difficult to apply precisely. This chapter considers those doctrines in detail: including the different `measures’ of compensation, and the defences of causation, remoteness, mitigation, etc. The paradigm measure of compensatory damages for breach of contract is the so-called ‘expectation’ or ‘loss of bargain’ species. Here the aim is to place the innocent party in the position in which he would have been if the contract had been properly performed. That aim cane be achieved notably by recovering the profits he had expected to gain under the contract. But where loss of profit cannot be easily proved, a ‘fall-back’ compensatory measure is reliance loss damages. These restore the innocent party monetarily to the position he enjoyed before the contract was breached, thus enabling him to recover his wasted expenditure.

29. Remedies beyond compensatory damages

This chapter considers gain-based and equitable remedies for breach of contract, which can be awarded in situations where restricting the claimant to damages would be inadequate. Damages may be awarded to strip a defendant of gains made from a breach of contract. Such ‘restitutionary damages’ are only awarded very rarely in ‘exceptional circumstances’ where the usual remedies for breach of contract are ‘inadequate’, and the claimant has a legitimate interest in preventing the defendant’s profit-making activity and depriving them of their profit. Where damages are inadequate to achieve justice, the court may grant equitable relief. The most important equitable orders are for specific performance and injunctions. Specific performance compels a person to perform their contract. Injunctions can either prevent a person from breaching their contract (prohibitory injunctions) or force a person to comply with their contract (mandatory injunctions).

JC Smith's The Law of Contract

Driven by exposition of the leading cases, JC Smith’s The Law of Contract offers the perfect balance between accessibility and authority. The strong focus on cases guides the reader through the intricacies of contract law with expert analysis ensuring key points are clear. The text begins with an introduction to contractual rights and duties. It looks at objectivity in contract law, the formation of bilateral and unilateral contracts, contract as agreement, offeror and offeree, estoppel, legal relations, and the role of third parties. It also considers the terms of the contract, interpretation of the contract, implication and rectification, and exclusion clauses and unfair terms. It goes on to look at issues such as duress, undue influence, good faith, capacity, illegality, contractual assumptions, breach of contract, remedies and damages, and remedies beyond compensatory damages.

27. Compensatory damages

This chapter focusses on compensatory damages for breach of contract. The innocent party will often seek to recover damages to compensate them for their ‘expectation loss’. Essentially, such loss corresponds to the profits the claimant hoped to make from the contract. Damages based upon ‘expectation loss’ protect the innocent party’s ‘expectation interest’ in having the contract performed. Damages are generally assessed at the date of breach. However, the court can take into account events that occur after the date of breach when assessing damages. Damages are not generally recoverable for disappointment or injured feelings resulting from the breach. But, if an object of a contract is to provide pleasure, or the distress is a result of physical inconvenience caused by the breach of contract, then damages for non-economic loss may be recoverable. Sometimes “negotiating damages” can be awarded to compensate the innocent party.