Limiting facotrs Flashcards
British Westinghouse
mitigation - C does not have to take any steps which a reasonable and prudent man would not take ordinarily in the course of business
- not beyond call of duty, just reasonable
Pilkington v Wood
no need to take significant financial risks
James Finlay & Co
C does not have to risk reputation
Clippers Oil & Co v Edingburgh
C does not have to do somethinf unaffordable
Kaines (UK)
Duty for reasonable effort to get substitute goods/servives
Yetton v Eastwoods
reasonable effort for alternative employment - damages limited to if alternative employment had been found
The Flying Fish
accept help to reduce losses
Selvanayagam
accept medical help to reduce losses
The Soholt
renegotiated with contract breaker
Holden v Bostock
spending money on advertising is reasonable
Bacon v Cooper
incurring hire charges is reasonable
The Borag
high interest loan = unreasonable
Stansbie v Troman
independant act by 3rd party means causal link is broken but here, D had a duty to prevent 3rd party causing loss (lock door to prevent burglary)
Monarch Steamship
acts of god
- it is an unseaworthy ship given but it was the typhoon that broke the ship (breaks chain of causation)
Lambert v Lewis
unreasonable act by C breaks chain of causation
- C knew it was broken yet continued to use it
Hadley v Baxendale
if losses could be reasonably contemplated at the time of entering the contract it is not too remote
recoverable losses:
1) arising naturally from breach of contract itself
2) loses reasonably supposed to have been in contemplation of both parties at the time they made contract as a probably result of the breach of it
The Heron II
C must foresee type (e.g. financial) not extent
C must also foresee a serious possibility
Victoria Laundry
He was an expert so he should know that his breach would result in losses
- the loss was foreseeable to he had to pay loss of profits but not for the exceptional one because he did not know about it
