DISCUSSION Damages Damages is a monetary compensation provided to the plaintiff by the court on account of injury or loss suffered by him due to tortious acts of the defendant. Damages are limited to the injuries and losses that a person has actually suffered and are provided not only as compensation to the injured person but also to punish the guilty and deter him from any such acts in the future. Under Section 12 of Indian Evidence Act, damages is also defined as; “the sum claimed or awarded in compensation for loss or injury suffered.” After the court has reached to the decision that the defendant is liable for a tort, it has to assess the quantum of damages which the injured party is entitled to receive from him. Now, the Courts have developed three principles upon which the damages are awarded in a suit: 1. Restitutio in
Expectation damage: the general standard of harms is that the casualty of a break of agreement is to be placed in a position he would have been in had the agreement been performed, while interestingly the extraordinary rule of Hadley v. Baxendale leaves the casualty far Shy of the position he would have been in if the agreement had been performed. 2. Rate of Performance: -The motivating forces to make contract relies on the dependability of agreements from this the desire harms is that they put on the breaking party the loss of the other party's share in contrast, if obligation was not in light of desire harms, the estimation of a contracted for execution to one gathering would not go into the other's party absolutely self-intrigued count whether to perform or rupture. 3. The extraordinary standard of Hadley v. Baxendale:-As customarily planned and connected, wanders from both the general guideline of desire harms and the general standards of harms outside the law of contract.
However, damages may be claim in tort deceit where misrepresentation was made fraudulently or negligently and there is provision for recovery of it under ss.2(1)[ Damages can be claimed for fraudulent and negligence misrepresentation] and 2(2)[ In Innocent misrepresentation, court have discretion to award damages in lieu of rescission] of MA provided there is no component of double, one may rescind and claim for damages except under s.2(2) of MA. Therefore, in fraudulent misrepresentation, victim can claim for damages in tort deceit in order to protect his reliance interest, so the punitive damages can be recovered. [ Kuddus v Chief Constable of Leicestershire Constabulary  UKHL 29 ;  AC 122] For negligence misrepresentation, the maker has committed tort deceit and so damages can be claimed. Since the innocent misrepresentation is not a tort deceit, therefore the only remedy available was rescission and indemnity yet court have discretion to award damages instead of recession based on s.2(1) of
The Court sets this standard: a plaintiff must show that a reasonable employee would have found the challenged action materially adverse, which in this context means it might have dissuaded a reasonable worker from making or supporting a charge of discrimination. Using this standard, the Court concludes that White has a valid claim of retaliation as a result of her reassignment and suspension without
The landmark case of Caparo v Dickman  2 AC 605 has created the three tier test in order to establish duty of care. The Caparo test departs from the case of Donoghue v Stevenson  AC 562 as well as the test laid down by Lord Wilberforce in the case of Anns v Merton LBC  AC 728 that begins by assuming that there is a duty of care and that damage or injury was foreseeable unless there is good reason to judge otherwise. Whereas the Caparo test begins by assuming that no duty of care is owed unless the criteria of the three tier test are
The plaintiff files a negligence claim so the defendant uses a contributory negligence claim against the plaintiff that effectively states the injury was caused partially because of the plaintiff's own actions; This is a contributory negligence counterclaim. If the defendant successfully proves the claim, the plaintiff may be totally or partially restricted from recovering damages. Comparative Negligence happens when each party’s negligence for a given injury is weighed when determining damages. There are two approaches with this method: pure comparative negligence and modified comparative negligence. For pure comparative, plaintiff damages are totalled and then reduced to reflect their contribution.
Introduction The principle ‘remoteness of damage’ is based on the maxim ‘injure on remota causa sedproxima spectator’. It prevents plaintiff from recovering any damages that do not flow or arise as a direct consequence of the wrongful act complained of. In a suit for damages in a tort case, the court awards pecuniary compensation to the plaintiff for the injury or damage caused to him by the wrongful act of the defendant. After it is proved that the defendant committed a wrongful act, the plaintiff would be entitled to compensation, may be nominal, though he does not prove any specific damage or injury resulting to him, in cases where the tort is actionable per se. Now the court’s enquiry resolves three questions: (1) Was the damage alleged
Finally, it examines what damages he has to pay (Zipursky, 2015). The plaintiff has the onus of proving by a preponderance of justice that the defendant owed him a duty of care and that the defendant breached that duty. He should demonstrate that he suffered actual harm and that the defendant's carelessness was the proximate cause of the injury suffered. Even in cases where the plaintiff contributed to the injury by standing in the way knowing they can be injured, the plaintiff will still be entitled to damages from the defendant as is stipulated in Title 42 Section 7102 of the 2010 Pennsylvania Code (Zipursky, 2015, p.2152). In light of the above explanation of negligence, apart from staff members of the student activity room, the supervisor, manager and the owner of the place, in this case, the sports and recreational department of Penn State University will be held liable in the event of an
A party may be obligated to pay damages where it has broken its contractual obligation in some ways other than a failure to pay such debt.41 In this particular case, the court held that the defendant’s obligation to pay arose due to a breach of its obligation to order the minimum quantity, hence, the claimant’s claim was a damages claim, which was subject to the rule on penalties.42 It must be noted that many ToP provisions are coupled with an obligation on the buyer to order a certain quantity and would fall within the rule against penalty. In the light of this judgment, there may be two simple ways of drafting ToP provisions in order to avoid payments being construed as damages, rather than a debt.43 Firstly, if a ‘make-up’ right is included in the contract, it would be extremely difficult to construe the amount paid as damages rather than debt, since the paying party is simply making a payment for the future performance of an obligation. Secondly, where a commercial imperative does not exist to compel the buyer to take the product, then it is advisable for the contract to clearly state that the buyer ‘may’ order quantities of the product, instead of imposing any obligation on the buyer that
INTRODUCTION The term tort is a latin equivalent to “tortum” which implies a work which is tortuous or twisted. It means a breach of duty which was not a contract , and gave rise to a civil cause of action , and is subjected to compensation . here compensation is strictly talking of unliquidated damages. The principle aim of the law of torts is to (i)provide compensation to the victim of the tort or conception (ii)grant of exemplary damages to show that deterrence to the wrong doers. The English law holds a more wider conception of tort than the hindu and muslim law.