Remedies - REMEDIES I OVERVIEW Remedies upon breach of contract Judicial Remedies(1(2 Damages(primary remedy \u2013 an aggrieved party will always

Remedies - REMEDIES I OVERVIEW Remedies upon breach of...

This preview shows page 1 - 3 out of 59 pages.

REMEDIES I. OVERVIEW Remedies upon breach of contract: Judicial Remedies (1) Damages ( primary remedy – an aggrieved party will always have a right to damages ) (2) Specific Remedies ( court is ordering you to do what you promised to do ) - action for an agreed sum ( not discretionary – common law remedy – you have a right to it although it may be qualified in some ways - specific performance ( discretionary remedy – court will only order if appropriate ) - injunction ( discretionary remedy – court will only order if appropriate ) Agreed Remedies (3) Agreed Remedies ( courts are more willing to give this remedy ) - liquidated (agreed) damages - deposit II. DAMAGES A. THE COMPENSATORY PRINCIPLE General rule: Award of damages is to compensate the aggrieved party for the loss he has suffered Not to deprive (punish) defaulting party of the gain he has obtained as a result of the breach of contract. Teacher v Calder (1889) Facts Joint-venture in today's terms. Entrepreneur (df) had a timber business and needed more capital. Invited Pf to invest 50,000 pounds to invest into this timber business. Df, as an incentive, agreed to provide an equivalent amount to invest in the same business, 50,000 pounds. Simple agreement. Breach of contract: Df (original owner of the timber business), withdrew his money from the business and invest his money in a distillery, which was immensely profitable. Pf invested in the non-profitable one, while Df invested money in a much more profitable one. Pf sued Df for the profits Df gained from distillery, as Df had drawn money from the timber business to invest in the distillery. Holding Damages are compensatory in nature. That means we look to the position of the Pf, and what loss had the Pf suffered as a nature of that conduct. The damages. The focus is on the Pf, the focus is NOT on the Df, and NOT on how he has been enriched by the breach of contract. Pf did not show how he had suffered loss as a result, and his claim failed. In contract law, the mere breach of contract gives one the right to damages, but one must prove the damages. If one does not satisfy the court that one has suffered substantive damages, then will only get nominal damages. But then there is costs against you for losing the case, ie pay the other party's lawyer fees. Surrey CC v Bredero Homes Ltd [1993] 3 All ER 705(CA) (BBF 633) Facts Pf council sold land to Df developer. Priced according to number of units developer wanted to build. Original contract is for Df to build 72 units. Df obtained new planning permission to build 77 units. Pf wanted to claim for the increased profits made by Df by breaching contract and sued. Pf was awarded nominal damages because Pf suffered no loss as a result of the breach. 1
Holding Dillon LJ: “the remedy at common law for a breach of contract is an award of damages and damages at common law are intended to compensate the victim for his loss , not to transfer to the victim, if he has suffered no loss, the benefit which the wrongdoer has gained by his breach of

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture

  • Left Quote Icon

    Student Picture