So I have an assessment this week for contract law relating to the assessment of damages. The quote pretty much implies that the rules are uncertain, and that judges use them in a flexible way, so that they can make sure the claimant gets a fair sum as compensation and that the defendant isn't let off for breaking his promise.
I am just trying to plan it, but I'm really struggling to think of points for this one.
So far I've got...
That the remedy of specific performance is (as a principle) no used for contracts of personal performance (but there are exceptions and I will state the exceptions and why they are exceptions)
Damages are always available for termination of a contract, other than where there is no loss (nominal damages) as this would simply punish the D and not put the claimant in the place he would aim to be, had the contract been performed (which is what damages aim to do)
If anyone could point me in the right direction that would be brilliant...
Thank you all! x
Contract law - damages question Watch
- Thread Starter
- 01-12-2010 16:31
- Thread Starter
- 02-12-2010 12:55
BUMP - anyone please? :/
- 04-12-2010 15:13
Don't think your current points are really valid, nominal damages is a bit of a non-point and specific performance doesn't answer the question if it is about damages
Try reading the chapter in Burrows' Casebook on Contract about remedies
The most important points include
- How do you decide whether something is a warranty, innominate term or condition, especially when you don't just look at how a term is described in a contract?
- Re: Innominate terms, how do you decide what is sufficiently serious?
- When are damages available for loss of amenity/enjoyment? A fair bit of uncertainty here
- How do you decide on quantum?
- When are damages not available for the cost of curing a defect? (see the important case concerning the dude who was tall and wanted a deep swimming pool but the contractors dug it too small and it would have cost a bomb to get the pool deepened)