Common Law Cases. Flashcards
What is the rule in Robinson v Harman?
The purpose of contractual damages is to put C in the position they would be in had the contract been performed.
What is the rule in Hadley v Baxendale?
Damages for breach of contract should cover all but only such losses as would have been within the contemplation of the parties at the time the contract was made.
Following the decision in The Golden Victory what statement can be made about the rule on the time of crystallization of damage in an action for breach of contract?
It depends on the circumstances.
In Attorney-General v. Blake, to what form of artistic expression by the Defendant George Blake did Her Majesty’s Government take exception?
A bbok
Victoria Laundries (Windsor) Ltd v. Newman Industries Ltd exemplifies what, in relation to the case of Hadley v. Baxendale?
Application of the case.
Which of the following statements best expresses the House of Lords’ decision in Ruxley Electronics v. Forsyth?
Losses are a matter of fact rather than law and the court may calculate damages however necessary in order to compensate the Claimant for the loss actually suffered.
Which of the following best describes the position of the law in relation to awarding punitive damages for breaches of contract?
Courts in England and Wales cannot award punitive damages for breach of contract.
What best describes the rule in Heron II?
Their Lordships found that the sole rule in need to use to measure damages was that the aggrieved party was entitled to recover such part of the damage actually caused by the breach as the defaulting party should reasonably have contemplated would flow from the breach.
What case is concerned with C’s duty to mitigate?
British Westinghouse Electric Co Ltd v. Underground Electric Railways Co of London Ltd
What was the subject matter of the contract in the case of Thompson (WL) Ltd v. Robinson (Gunmakers) Ltd?
A car.
What is the rule in Newman Laundry Ltd v Newman Industries?
Not too remote if losses were reasonably foreseeable by the defendant. But:
-D assumed to have knowledge of a reasonable person.
-C may prove D had knowledge of special circumstances giving rise to loss.
In Hadley v Baxendale when were losses not too remote?
-Losses arise naturally from the breach.
Or
-Losses may reasonably be in the contemplation of the parties at the time they made the contract, as a possible result in the breach of it.
In Heron II how is reasonable foresight different in contract and tort?
Contract= ‘Foreseeable if it is a serious possibility’.
Tort= Foreseeable if a ‘slight possibility’.
-Only the type of consequences need to be foreseeable, not the specific consequences.
What is Payzu v Saunders an example of?
Loss of an expected chance.
Why was C in Payzu v Saunders not entitled to damages?
Failure to mitigate.
What did the Sales of Goods Act 1893 stipulate?
‘When there is an available market for the goods the measure of damages is prima facie, the difference between the contract price and the market price, when the goods ought to have been accepted/deal commenced.’
What Act is the Hadley v Baxendale rules linked to?
1893 Sales of Goods Act.
What is the first limb of Hadley v Baxendale?
Was the loss within reasonable contemplation of the D. They would not agree to liability as contract losses were beyond their capability.
What is the second limb of Hadley v Baxendale?
Ø D must have been given notice, told what was at stake. This would extend their liability. ‘If special circumstances were communicated to the Ds and thus known to both parties, the damages would be the amount of injuries known to both parties.’
In Chaplin v Hicks what did the damages awarded signify?
Loss of an expected chance. These were speculative losses.
What is the rule in Thomson v Robinson?
By S.50 of the Sale of Goods Act 1893 “Where the buyer wrongfully… refuses to accept and pay for goods, the seller may maintain an action against him for damages… Where there is an available market for the goods in question the measure o damages is prima facie to be ascertained by the difference between the contract price and the market or current price…”
