{"title":"20. Damages","authors":"Elizabeth Macdonald, Ruth Atkins, Jens Krebs","doi":"10.1093/he/9780198752844.003.0020","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This chapter deals with the primary remedy for breach of contract: damages. It looks at the basic test, which allows for the recovery of expectation loss, and also considers recovery of reliance loss and a restitutionary sum. The further limitations on recovery such as remoteness and the ‘duty’ to mitigate are considered, as is the distinction between liquidated damages and penalty clauses. The problem of recovering for non-financial losses—mental distress and the consumer surplus—is also addressed. Finally, the chapter looks at how the rules on penalties have been relaxed with the landmark judgments in Cavendish and ParkingEye (2015).","PeriodicalId":214244,"journal":{"name":"Koffman & Macdonald's Law of Contract","volume":"11 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-08-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Koffman & Macdonald's Law of Contract","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/he/9780198752844.003.0020","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
This chapter deals with the primary remedy for breach of contract: damages. It looks at the basic test, which allows for the recovery of expectation loss, and also considers recovery of reliance loss and a restitutionary sum. The further limitations on recovery such as remoteness and the ‘duty’ to mitigate are considered, as is the distinction between liquidated damages and penalty clauses. The problem of recovering for non-financial losses—mental distress and the consumer surplus—is also addressed. Finally, the chapter looks at how the rules on penalties have been relaxed with the landmark judgments in Cavendish and ParkingEye (2015).