LGS02 Remedies Flashcards
What must the claim form say about Remedies?
CPR, r. 16.2(1)(b), (c)
The claim form must … (b) specify the remedy which the claimant seeks;
(c) where the claimant is making a claim for money, contain a statement of value in accordance with r. 16.3;
(cc) where the claimant’s only claim is for a specified sum, contain a statement of the interest accrued on that sum …
r. 16.2(5) The court may grant any remedy to which the claimant is entitled even if that remedy is not specified in the claim form.
What are nominal damages?
Liability is established, but no compensatable loss has been suffered.
- Available where damage is not an essential element, eg contract, libel
- Not available in negligence because damage is an essential element
- Usually winner pays the costs if all they get is nominal damages
What are compensatory damages?
Broadly falls into:
- Pecuniary awards (special damages), where a measurable money sum can be calculated
- Non-pecuniary awards (general damages), where the court assesses an amount based mostly on conventional awards in similar cases
What are Aggravated damages?
- Technically a sub-category of Compensatory Damages
- Additional compensation “for the Defendant’s objectionable behaviour”
- Compensate for injury to feelings caused by the manner in which the wrong was committed
- Consequently they cannot be awarded to a company, because it has no feelings
- Potentially can be awarded in any class of action, not just tort (Williams v Settle [1960] 1 WLR 1072, an infringement of copyright case)
- Said to be unavailable in clinical negligence (Kralj v McGrath [1986] 1 All ER 54)
- Must be pleaded separately in the PoC (CPR, r. 16.4(1)(c))
What are Exemplary damages?
Remedies Manual p 47
- Technically not compensatory
- “Awarded to show the court’s disapproval of the Defendant’s behaviour”
- Rookes v Barnard [1964] AC 1129
- exemplary damages can only be awarded:
- (a) where there is oppressive, arbitrary or unconstitutional behaviour by government servants;
- (b) where the Defendant’s conduct has been calculated to make a profit exceeding the amount that would be awarded by compensatory damages;
- exemplary damages can only be awarded:
- Editor of major newspaper “publish and be damned” libel…or*
* (c) where exemplary damages are expressly authorised by statute
What are Liquidated damages?
The sum quantified by a clause in a contract as the sum payable in the event of breach.
Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre Co Ltd v New Garage and Motor Co [1915] AC 79
- A genuine pre-estimate of the loss occasioned by breach is lawful
- Anything else is illegal as a penalty, and not recoverable
What are foreign currency damages?
Only if that currency represents the true currency of C’s loss: The Despina R [1979] AC 685
PD 16, para 9.1:
Where a claim is for a sum of money expressed in a foreign currency it must expressly state:
(1) that the claim is for payment in a specified foreign currency,
(2) why it is for payment in that currency,
(3) the Sterling equivalent of the sum at the date of the claim, and
(4) the source of the exchange rate relied on to calculate the Sterling equivalent.
What is the compensatory principle in damages for breach of contract?
Damages for breach of contract are intended to put the Claimant into the position they would have been in if the Defendant had not breached the contract. Remedies Manual p 26
Sometimes called expectation loss
This is the main rule.
What is the important prinicple in Johnson v Agnew?
Johnson v Agnew [1980] AC 367 is a landmarkEnglish contract law case on the date for assessing damages. Lord Wilberforce decided that the date appropriate is the date of breach, or when a contracting party could reasonably be aware of a breach.
Five major principles it laid down were,
- termination for breach of contract is “prospective”, not “retrospective”; i.e. repudiatory breach of contract discharges both parties from future performance of their contractual obligations, but leaves their accrued rights intact (and themselves open to damages)
- a claimant for specific performance does not forfeit his right to terminate the contract by accepting a defendant’s repudiatory breach
- when a specific performance decree is made, a court oversees performance, and it has the sole jurisdiction to determine whether that obligation can be discharged
- common law damages are assessed at the date of the breach of the contract, though the court may fix another date if justice requires
- the same principles for awarding common law damages applies to awarding equitable damages under s 50 Supreme Court Act 1981
What was the application of Johnson v Agnew in Golden Strait Corpn v Nippon Yusen Kubisha Kaisha [2007] 2 AC 353?
- 7.1998 Charterparty entered into. Included a war clause
- 7.2001 Nippon repudiated the contract
- 3.2003 Gulf War started
- 12.2005 End of charterparty term
Held: On the facts, the Agnew v Johnson principle had to yield to the importance of achieving an accurate assessment of the loss actually incurred. The contract breached included a war clause, and war had broken out which would have entitled Nippon to terminate the contract on 21.3.2003. As Nippon would probably have cancelled the contract at that point, damages were limited to the period between 14.7.2001 and 21.3.2003.
What is reliance loss?
This compensates the Claimant with a view to putting the Claimant back into the position as if the contract had never been made.
- Compensates C for wasted expenditure
- Sometimes used where expectation loss damages are difficult to quantify
- Cannot be used to enable C to avoid losses incurred through a bad bargain
What is the test for causation in contract?
Was the breach of contract an effective cause of the loss?
When is contributory negligence available?
Not available if the only cause of action is contract.
Is available if liability gives rise to concurrent liability in contract and tort.
What are some good examples of reliance loss?
Common examples of reliance expenses are for collection of goods (where the buyer is required by the contract to collect the goods and after incurring charges the seller repudiates the contract), storage and transport charges.
According to Anglia Television Ltd v Reed, pre-contractual expenses are recoverable as part of the reliance loss, provided ‘it was such as would reasonably be in the contemplation of the parties as likely to be wasted if the contract was broken’ (per Lord Denning MR at p 64).
What is the effect of contributory negligence on a claim for damages for breach of contract?
There are three classes of case:
(a) Those where liability arises both in contract and tort coextensively, in which case the Law Reform (Contributory Negligence) Act 1945 applies and damages will be reduced to take account of any contributory negligence on the part of the claimant (see Forsikringsaktieselskapet Vesta v Butcher [1989] AC 852).
(b) Those where the breach does not amount to a tort as well, in which case the 1945 Act does not apply and any contributory negligence on the part of the claimant can be disregarded (see Lambert v Lewis [1982] AC 225).
(c) Those where there is both strict liability in contract and coextensive liability in contract and tort. In such a case there can be no defence of contributory negligence (Barclays Bank plc v Fairclough Building Ltd [1995] 1 All ER 289).
What is the test in Hadley v Baxendale for Remoteness in Breach of Contract?
Damage is not too remote if either:
(a) the loss flows naturally from the breach of contract; or
(b) the loss can reasonably be supposed to have been in the contemplation of the parties when they entered into the contract as the probable result of breach
Give a brief summary of Heron II
Czarnikow Ltd v Koufos (The Heron II) [1969] 1 AC 350
A contract for the carriage of a cargo of sugar was delayed by 9 days. The market price of sugar dropped following this delay due to the arrival of another cargo of sugar. The claimant sought to recover the difference from the defendant for their breach of contract. The defendant argued the damages were too remote since it was just as likely that the market price could increase.
Held:
Under the second limb in Hadley v Baxendale it was only necessary that the losses were in the reasonable contemplation of the parties as a possible result of the breach. There was no requirement as to the degree of probability of that loss arising. Since the defendant must have known that market prices fluctuate, the loss would have been in his contemplation as a possible result of the breach.
Give a brief summary of The Achilleas
Charterer delivered the ship 9 days late at the end of a charterparty. As a result the owner had to reduce the daily rate for the follow-on charter to the next charterer by $8,000 a day (for 191 days). The issue was whether damages would be assessed at $8,000 per day for the length of a new charter, or just the loss to the owner for the additional 9 days on the old charter.
Principle: It is not sufficient that a particular loss is “not unlikely” if, as a matter of law, it is not reasonable to assume the defendant had undertaken responsibility for the loss. This is not merely a question of probability, but also of what the contracting parties had to be taken to have had in mind, having regard to the nature and object of their business transaction.
Held: Damages were restricted to the loss (based on the difference between the market rate and the charter rate) on the over-run period of 9 days.
What claim is made when goods are delivered but not paid for?
Where goods are delivered but not paid for, the claim is for the price (Sale of Goods Act 1979 (SoGA 1979), s. 49), and not a claim for “damages”.
E+W+S+N.I.
49(1) Where, under a contract of sale, the property in the goods has passed to the buyer and he wrongfully neglects or refuses to pay for the goods according to the terms of the contract, the seller may maintain an action against him for the price of the goods.
What is the claim when there is a breach of implied terms as to quality of goods?
Breach of SoGA implied terms as to quality (SoGA 1979, s. 53)
This is a claim by the buyer of goods, who by SoGA 1979, s. 53 is entitled to:
- Loss directly and naturally resulting in the ordinary course of events from breach
- Prima facie this is the difference between the value of the goods at the time of delivery to the buyer and the value they would have had if no breach (s. 53(3))
What is the remedy for breach of warrant?
- “53(1) Where there is a breach of warranty by the seller, or where the buyer elects (or is compelled) to treat any breach of a condition on the part of the seller as a breach of warranty, the buyer is not by reason only of such breach of warranty entitled to reject the goods; but he may—*
- (a) set up against the seller the breach of warranty in diminution or extinction of the price, or*
- (b) maintain an action against the seller for damages for the breach of warranty.*
- (2) The measure of damages for breach of warranty is the estimated loss directly and naturally resulting, in the ordinary course of events, from the breach of warranty.*
- (3) In the case of breach of warranty of quality such loss is prima facie the difference between the value of the goods at the time of delivery to the buyer and the value they would have had if they had fulfilled the warranty.*
- (4) The fact that the buyer has set up the breach of warranty in diminution or extinction of the price does not prevent him from maintaining an action for the same breach of warranty if he has suffered further damage.”*
What remedies are available in consumer contracts?
In consumer contracts the consumer (Consumer Rights Act 2015, s. 19) may exercise:
(a) the short-term right to reject (ss 20 and 22);
(b) the right to repair or replacement (s. 23);
(c) the right to price reduction (s. 24);
(d) the final right to reject (s. 20); and
(e) any other remedy, including claiming damages and the s. 53 set-off (s. 19(11)).
When can damages in contract be obtained for distress and disappointment?
- The general rule is that damages for distress are not available in an action for breach of contract.
- However, there has been some slackening in the strictness of this rule, so that in contracts entered into for purposes of enjoyment (see Jarvis v Swans Tours Ltd [1973] QB 233) damages will be available for disappointment,
- and in contracts entered into to avoid distress or to gain peace of mind, damages will be available for the failure to prevent that distress (see Heywood v Wellers [1976] QB 446).
- The scope of this exception was extended by the House of Lords in Farley v Skinner [2001] 4 All ER 801.
- It is not necessary that the very purpose of the contract should have been to provide pleasure, relaxation or peace of mind; it is sufficient that this was a major or important part of the contract.
- However, damages under this head should be restrained and modest. The House of Lords regarded £10,000 as right on the upper limit.
- Where the damages are for injury to feelings, the appropriate range is £500 to £25,000 (Chief Constable of West Yorkshire v Vento [2003] IRLR 102).
- Applying this principle, it was held in Hamilton Jones v David & Snape [2004] 1 All ER 657 that a claimant could recover damages for the distress caused by the loss of the company of her children, where this loss was caused by the negligence of her solicitors, who had been specifically instructed in order to avoid such a loss.
- Damages for distress can also be claimed as consequential to physical inconvenience because this is taken to be obviously within the contemplation of the parties at the time of contracting (see Perry v Sydney Phillips and Son [1982] 1 WLR 1297).
- Damages for distress arising out of wrongful dismissal from a contract of employment cannot be recovered (Addis v Gramophone Co Ltd [1909] AC 488, reaffirmed by the House of Lords in Johnson v Unisys Ltd [2001] 2 All ER 801).
- No claim for inconvenience or distress can be made by a company (see Firsteel Cold Rolled Products v Anaco Precision Pressings The Times, 21 November 1994).
- There is a comprehensive examination of the quantification of damages for distress and disappointment in spoilt holiday cases in Milner v Carnival plc [2010] 3 All ER 701.
Can you claim Property Damage as a result of Breach of Contract ?
- Usually diminution of value
- Sometimes: cost of reinstatement
Recovery of damages based on the cost of reinstatement depends on whether it will be, or was, reasonable to insist on remedial work being done.
- A factor is whether C has already done the work, or the degree to which C shows a sufficient intention of having the work done
- Where the cost of reinstatement is out of all proportion to the advantage gained by the work it will be unreasonable for C to insist on the work
- See Ruxley Electronics v Forsyth [1996] AC 344 (the swimming pool that should have been 7 feet 6 inches deep but was only built to 6 feet 9 inches).
Can damages be awarded for loss of amenity?
Pool built to the wrong depth. The trial judge gave the diminution of value was zero and the cost of cure was £21,560. He awarded £750 for inconvenience and £2500 for loss of amenity. The Court of Appeal said the cost of rebuilding the pool should be awarded. The appeal succeeded. The damages award was disproportionate, and should have been limited to the loss of amenity only. The cost of reinstatement or reconstruction may be an inappropriate standard if it was disproportionate to the loss. ‘There are not two alternative measures of damages, as opposite poles, but only one; namely, the loss truly suffered by the promisee.’ Where the defect is minor it may be appropriate for an award for dissappointed expectation rather than any difference in value. The fact that such damages could not be calculated mathematically did not mean they could not be calculated.