Damages for disappointment and harm to reputation Flashcards
What is the general rule for Damages for disappointment and harm to reputation?
As a general rule, damages for disappointment resulting from a breach of contract are not recoverable. So, there will be no award for the disappointment and upset caused by a breach.
What was held in Addis v Gramophone 1909?
HOL allowed claim for financial loss but rejected claim for harmful reputation.
Claimant was wrongfully dismissed.
What was held in the case of Mahmud and Malik v BCCI [1997] ? - bank fraud case - damage to employable reputation.
claimed ‘stigma damages’. It was argued that the BCCI had breached an implied term of trust and confidence. This implied term would be breached where the employer acts fraudulently. It was then claimed that such a breach caused financial loss because it made it so difficult to get another job. Action was successful as identified a breach in the new implied term.
What is Addis consistently cited for?`
Addis continues to be cited as authority for the rule that damages for breach of contract cannot be awarded for harmed reputation. However, what Malik makes clear is that if there is an independent breach which causes financial loss, then it is actionable on ordinary contract principles, even if coincidentally, there might be an action for defamation.
What was held in the case of Johnson v Univs LTD?
This was a claim for damages for unfair dismissal. The claimant also sought damages for the manner of the breach (the way he was dismissed). He claimed that the manner of the breach caused a nervous breakdown and wanted damages to reflect it. Here the HL held that the claim reflecting the manner of the breach had to fail and Addis was cited as key authority on the point.
What does the case of Johnson v Uniys Ltd show?
The case shows that there is a distinction between loss resulting from an actual breach and, loss resulting from the manner of the breach (ie the way the contract was breached).
