|
Penalty Clause
Penal damages are liquidated damages which exceed reasonable compensatory damages, making them invalid under common law. While liquidated damage clauses set a pre-agreed value on the expected loss to one party if the other party were to breach the contract, penal damages go further and seek to penalise the breaching party beyond the reasonable losses from the breach. Many clauses which are found to be penal are expressed as liquidated damages clauses but have been seen by courts as excessive and thus invalid. The judicial approach to penal damages is conceptually important as it is one of the few examples of judicial paternalism in contract law. Even if two parties genuinely and without coercion wish to consent to a contract which includes a penal clause, they are unable to. So, for example, a person wishing to give up smoking cannot contract with a third party to be fined $100 each time they smoke as this figure does not represent the expectation loss of the contract. A wholesal ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Liquidated Damages
Liquidated damages, also referred to as liquidated and ascertained damages (LADs), are damages whose amount the parties designate during the formation of a contract for the injured party to collect as compensation upon a specific breach (e.g., late performance). This is most applicable where the damages are intangible, such as a failure by the contractor on a public project to fulfill minority business subcontracting quotas. An average of the likely costs which may be incurred in dealing with a breach may be used. Authority for the proposition that averaging is the appropriate approach may be taken from the case of ''English Hop Growers v Dering'', 2 KB 174, CA (1928). When damages are not predetermined/assessed in advance, then the amount recoverable is said to be "at large" (to be agreed or determined by a court or tribunal in the event of breach). The purpose of a liquidated damages clause is to increase certainty and avoid the legal costs of determining actual damages later if ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Compensatory Damages
At common law, damages are a remedy in the form of a monetary award to be paid to a claimant as compensation for loss or injury. To warrant the award, the claimant must show that a breach of duty has caused foreseeable loss. To be recognised at law, the loss must involve damage to property, or mental or physical injury; pure economic loss is rarely recognised for the award of damages. Compensatory damages are further categorized into special damages, which are economic losses such as loss of earnings, property damage and medical expenses, and general damages, which are non-economic damages such as pain and suffering and emotional distress. Rather than being compensatory, at common law damages may instead be nominal, contemptuous or exemplary. History Among the Saxons, a monetary value called a ''weregild'' was assigned to every human being and every piece of property in the Salic Code. If property was stolen or someone was injured or killed, the guilty person had to pay the wer ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Common Law
In law, common law (also known as judicial precedent, judge-made law, or case law) is the body of law created by judges and similar quasi-judicial tribunals by virtue of being stated in written opinions."The common law is not a brooding omnipresence in the sky, but the articulate voice of some sovereign or quasi sovereign that can be identified," ''Southern Pacific Company v. Jensen'', 244 U.S. 205, 222 (1917) (Oliver Wendell Holmes, dissenting). By the early 20th century, legal professionals had come to reject any idea of a higher or natural law, or a law above the law. The law arises through the act of a sovereign, whether that sovereign speaks through a legislature, executive, or judicial officer. The defining characteristic of common law is that it arises as precedent. Common law courts look to the past decisions of courts to synthesize the legal principles of past cases. '' Stare decisis'', the principle that cases should be decided according to consistent principled rules so ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Breach Of Contract
Breach of contract is a legal cause of action and a type of civil wrong, in which a binding agreement or bargained-for exchange is not honored by one or more of the parties to the contract by non-performance or interference with the other party's performance. Breach occurs when a party to a contract fails to fulfill its obligation(s), whether partially or wholly, as described in the contract, or communicates an intent to fail the obligation or otherwise appears not to be able to perform its obligation under the contract. Where there is breach of contract, the resulting damages have to be paid to the aggrieved party by the party breaching the contract. If a contract is rescinded, parties are legally allowed to undo the work unless doing so would directly charge the other party at that exact time. It is important to bear in mind that contract law is not the same from country to country. Each country has its own independent, freestanding law of contract. Therefore, it makes sense ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Commonwealth Law Reports
The Commonwealth Law Reports (CLR) () are the authorised reports of decisions of the High Court of Australia. The Commonwealth Law Reports are published by the Lawbook Company, a division of Thomson Reuters. James Merralls AM QC was the editor of the Reports from 1969 until his death in 2016. The current editors are Christopher Horan KC and Paul Vout KC. Each reported judgment includes a headnote written by an expert reporter (by convention, a practising barrister) which, as an authorised report, has been approved by the High Court. The current reporters are as follows: * Roshan Chaile * Ella Delany * Bora Kaplan * Rudi Kruse * James McComish * William Newland * Alistair Pound SC * Daniel Reynolds * Alexander Solomon-Bridge * Julia Wang * Michael Wells * Jillian Williams * Radhika Withana The headnotes include a summary of counsel's legal arguments. The Reports also include tables of cases reported, affirmed, reversed, overruled, applied or judicially commented on and cited ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre Co Ltd V New Garage & Motor Co Ltd
is an English contract law case, concerning the extent to which damages may be sought for failure to perform of a contract when a sum is fixed in a contract. It held that only if a sum is of an unconscionable amount will it be considered penal and unenforceable. It should not be confused with ''Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre Co Ltd v Selfridge & Co Ltd'', which held that the same resale price maintenance practice was unenforceable against a third party reseller as a matter of the English rule of privity of contract. Facts Dunlop sued its tyre retailer, New Garage, for breaching an agreement to not resell Dunlop tyres at a price lower than that listed in the contract. The agreement then said if that did happen, New Garage would pay £5 per tyre ‘by way of liquidated damages and not as a penalty’. The judge held the £5 sum was liquidated damages and enforceable. The Court of Appeal held the clause was a penalty and Dunlop could only get nominal damages. Dunlop appealed. Judgment T ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Paternalism
Paternalism is action that limits a person's or group's liberty or autonomy and is intended to promote their own good. Paternalism can also imply that the behavior is against or regardless of the will of a person, or also that the behavior expresses an attitude of superiority. Paternalism, paternalistic and paternalist have all been used as a pejorative for example in the context of societal and/or political realms and references. Some such as John Stuart Mill think paternalism to be appropriate towards children, saying: Paternalism towards adults is sometimes thought of as treating them as if they were children. Etymology The word ''paternalism'' derives from the adjective ''paternal'', which entered the English language in the 15th century from Old French ''paternel'' (cf. Old Occitan ''paternal'', as in Catalan, Spanish and Portuguese), itself from Medieval Latin ''paternalis''. The classical Latin equivalent was ''paternus'' "fatherly", from ''pater'' "father". Types ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
UK Supreme Court
The Supreme Court of the United Kingdom (initialism: UKSC or the acronym: SCOTUK) is the final court of appeal in the United Kingdom for all civil cases, and for criminal cases originating in England, Wales and Northern Ireland. As the United Kingdom’s highest appellate court for these matters, it hears cases of the greatest public or constitutional importance affecting the whole population. The Court usually sits in the Middlesex Guildhall in Westminster, though it can sit elsewhere and has, for example, sat in the Edinburgh City Chambers, the Royal Courts of Justice in Belfast, and the Tŷ Hywel Building in Cardiff. The United Kingdom has a doctrine of parliamentary sovereignty, so the Supreme Court is much more limited in its powers of judicial review than the constitutional or supreme courts of some other countries. It cannot overturn any primary legislation made by Parliament. However, as with any court in the UK, it can overturn secondary legislation if, for an examp ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Cavendish Square Holding BV V Talal El Makdessi
, together with its companion case ''ParkingEye Ltd v Beavis'', are English contract law cases concerning the validity of penalty clauses and (in relation to ''ParkingEye Ltd v Beavis'') the application of the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Directive. The UK Supreme Court ruled on both cases together on 4 November 2015, updating the established legal rule on penalty clauses and replacing the test of whether or not a disputed clause is "a genuine pre-estimate of loss" with a test asking whether it imposed a proportionate detriment in relation to any "legitimate interest" of the innocent party. Commentators on the ruling have noted that "these cases provide some welcome clarification to the law in this area". Facts ''Cavendish Square Holding BV v Makdessi'' In ''Makdessi'', because the issue of penalty clauses had been taken as a preliminary issue, the appeal was heard on the basis of an agreed set of facts (the court having not yet heard evidence or made any determinations). T ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Punitive Damages
Punitive damages, or exemplary damages, are damages assessed in order to punish the defendant for outrageous conduct and/or to reform or deter the defendant and others from engaging in conduct similar to that which formed the basis of the lawsuit. Although the purpose of punitive damages is not to compensate the plaintiff, the plaintiff will receive all or some of the punitive damages in award. Punitive damages are often awarded if compensatory damages are deemed an inadequate remedy. The court may impose them to prevent undercompensation of plaintiffs and to allow redress for undetectable torts and taking some strain away from the criminal justice system. Punitive damages are most important for violations of the law that are hard to detect. However, punitive damages awarded under court systems that recognize them may be difficult to enforce in jurisdictions that do not recognize them. For example, punitive damages awarded to one party in a US case would be difficult to get recogn ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Tort
A tort is a civil wrong that causes a claimant to suffer loss or harm, resulting in legal liability for the person who commits the tortious act. Tort law can be contrasted with criminal law, which deals with criminal wrongs that are punishable by the state. While criminal law aims to punish individuals who commit crimes, tort law aims to compensate individuals who suffer harm as a result of the actions of others. Some wrongful acts, such as assault and battery, can result in both a civil lawsuit and a criminal prosecution in countries where the civil and criminal legal systems are separate. Tort law may also be contrasted with contract law, which provides civil remedies after breach of a duty that arises from a contract. Obligations in both tort and criminal law are more fundamental and are imposed regardless of whether the parties have a contract. While tort law in civil law jurisdictions largely derives from Roman law, common law jurisdictions derive their tort law from cus ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Treble Damages
In United States law, treble damages is a term that indicates that a statute permits a court to triple the amount of the actual/compensatory damages to be awarded to a prevailing plaintiff. Treble damages are a multiple of, and not an addition to, actual damages in some instances. On occasion, however, as in California Civil Code § 1719, they are additive. When such damages are multiplicative and a person received an award of $100 for an injury, a court applying treble damages would raise the award to $300. Some statutes mandate awards of treble damages for all violations. Examples of statutes with mandatory treble damages provisions are the Clayton Antitrust Act and RICO. Some statutes allow for an award of treble damages only if there is a showing that the violation was willful. For example, "up to three times the amount found or assessed" may be awarded by a court in the United States for willful patent infringement. The idea behind the creation of such damages is that they wi ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
.png "Click for more on -> Common Law")
