Remedies in Contract Flascahrds

HideShow resource information
Expectation Interest: the profit that C has lost as a result of D's breach.
Park B in Robinson v Harman 1848: putting the claimant into the position as if the contract was performed
1 of 21
Calculating Expectation Interest
Two way of calculating: 1. Cost of Cure and 2. Diminution in value
2 of 21
Restitution Damages
Recovering the profit D has nade as a result of the breach - Rarely allowed - AG v Blake 2001 - "loss of bargaining opportunity"
3 of 21
Reliance Interest
Being returned to the position C was in before the contract - These claims for wasted expenditure are only allowed in exceptional circumstances
4 of 21
Causation Test
"But For" Test - Bank of Credit and Commerce v Ali (No 2) 2002
5 of 21
Unforeseeable act of third party breaks the chain
Weld-Blundell v Stephens 1920
6 of 21
Unreasonable conduct of Claimant may also break the chain
Quinn v Burch Bros [1966] (contributory negligence has no effect)
7 of 21
Claimants can recover losses which are: (Hadley v Baxendale 1854)
1, Fairly and reasonably considered to have arises naturally from the breach & 2. Can be reasonably supposed to have been in both parties contemplation at time of contracting(THE LOSS MUST BE FORESEEABLE)
8 of 21
If C increases loss he cannot claim for the increase
Baxendale [1874]
9 of 21
If C does not take reasonable steps to minimise losses he will not beable to claim for full damages
Kaines UK [1993]
10 of 21
But he can claim for losses caused by reasonable conduct
Banco de Portugal [1932]
11 of 21
Generally D not liable for distress, frustration (Non-Pecuniary Losses + Exception)
Watts v Morrow [1991] - Unless the object of the contract is to avoid such feelings or to provide pleasure
12 of 21
NPL Exception 1
1. NPL results from personal injury - Wren v Holt 1903
13 of 21
NPL Exception 2
2,NPL results from physical inconvenience or discomfort - Bailey v Bullock [1950] (living in cramped conditions)
14 of 21
NPL Exception 3
3. Avoiding the NPL was object of the contract - Farley v Skinner (No 2) [2001]
15 of 21
NPL Exception 4
4. NPL results from injury to reputation - Bunning v Lyric Theatre [1894]
16 of 21
Judicial Remedies for Breach
As of Right: Damages, Enforcement of terms & Discretionary: Specific performance, Injunctions
17 of 21
Specific performance only granted where serves better justice than damages
Tito [1977]
18 of 21
Courts refuse SP if (4 Reasons)
1. will cause D severe hardship, 2. Contract obtained unfairly 3. Claimant does not have clean hands 4. SP is impossible
19 of 21
SP is refused for the following 4 contract types
1. which involve personal service 2. require constant supervision 3. are too vague 4. are gratuitous
20 of 21
Contractually Stipulated Remedies - Liquidated damages contracted for by the parties
Cannot be a penalty clause - test is whether amount stated is a genuine pre-estimate of loss - terms in contract are not conclusive
21 of 21

Other cards in this set

Card 2

Front

Calculating Expectation Interest

Back

Two way of calculating: 1. Cost of Cure and 2. Diminution in value

Card 3

Front

Restitution Damages

Back

Preview of the front of card 3

Card 4

Front

Reliance Interest

Back

Preview of the front of card 4

Card 5

Front

Causation Test

Back

Preview of the front of card 5
View more cards

Comments

No comments have yet been made

Similar Law resources:

See all Law resources »See all Contract Law resources »