However the purchaser cannot where he had been led into possession before

However the purchaser cannot where he had been led

This preview shows page 12 out of 12 pages.

However the purchaser cannot, where he had been led into possession before completion and had spent money on improvements to the property, claim such expenses since they would not usually have been within the contemplation of the parties and having elected to repudiate the contract the purchaser cannot recover expenses which had only occurred at a time when he had still been seeking specific performance. Building Contracts In Tan Ah Chim & Sons Sdn Bhd v Ooi Bee Tat & Anor (SC) (a) loss of profit normally to be expected, which the contractor would otherwise have earned but for the delay or disruption, is an allowable head of claim under Hadley v Baxendale. (b) However, a contractor would be entitled to recover an exception of high profit on another contract unless this fact was known to the employer at the time the delayed or disrupted contract had been entered into. (c) Additional expenditure on labour, materials or plant due to increases in cost during a period of delay is an allowable head of claim. (d) The correct measure would be the difference between what the contractor would have spent on labour, materials and plant and what he has actually had to spend over the whole period of the work as a result of the delay and disruption concerned. In York Mok Hin v United Malay States Sugar Industries (FC) , where in breach of a contract, the work has been left incomplete, whether by abandonment, termination or otherwise, or containing defects, the direct measure of the damage will be the difference between the reasonable cost to the employer of repairing the defects or completing the work, together with the sums said by or due from him under the contract and the sums which would have been payable by him under the contract if it had been properly carried out. Where the former does not exist the later - only nominal damages. The loss would be within the 1st limb. Goods without a readily available market In Heller Factoring Sdn Bhd v Metalco Industries Sdn Bhd (COA) , where the machine which was wrongfully repossessed - the machine was not standard item which was readily available in the market in terms of specification or price - proper measure of damages in such a situation was that a sum of money which would restore the innocent party to its status before the seizure - the difference in the price at which they bought the machine and the price at which it was sold plus all the abortive expenditure the innocent party has incurred, he can claim for expenses as there is no alternative machine available.
Image of page 12

You've reached the end of your free preview.

Want to read all 12 pages?

What students are saying

  • Left Quote Icon

    As a current student on this bumpy collegiate pathway, I stumbled upon Course Hero, where I can find study resources for nearly all my courses, get online help from tutors 24/7, and even share my old projects, papers, and lecture notes with other students.

    Student Picture

    Kiran Temple University Fox School of Business ‘17, Course Hero Intern

  • Left Quote Icon

    I cannot even describe how much Course Hero helped me this summer. It’s truly become something I can always rely on and help me. In the end, I was not only able to survive summer classes, but I was able to thrive thanks to Course Hero.

    Student Picture

    Dana University of Pennsylvania ‘17, Course Hero Intern

  • Left Quote Icon

    The ability to access any university’s resources through Course Hero proved invaluable in my case. I was behind on Tulane coursework and actually used UCLA’s materials to help me move forward and get everything together on time.

    Student Picture

    Jill Tulane University ‘16, Course Hero Intern

Stuck? We have tutors online 24/7 who can help you get unstuck.
A+ icon
Ask Expert Tutors You can ask You can ask You can ask (will expire )
Answers in as fast as 15 minutes
A+ icon
Ask Expert Tutors