Search over 40,000 articles from the original, classic Encyclopedia Britannica, 11th Edition.
|
See also:DAMAGES (through O. Fr. damage, mod. Fr. dommage, from See also:Lat. damnum, loss) , the See also:compensation which a See also:person who has suffered a legal wrong is by See also:law entitled to recover from the person responsible for the wrong . Loss caused by an See also:act which is not a legal wrong (damnum sine injuria) is not recoverable, e.g. where a See also:father loses a See also:young See also:child by the See also:negligence of a third party . The principle of compensation in law makes its first See also:appearance as a substitute for See also:personal See also:retaliation . In See also:primitive law some-thing of the nature of the Anglo-Saxon wer-gild, or the irocvtit of the Iliad, appears to be universal . It marks out with See also:great minuteness the measure of the compensation appropriate to each particular See also:case of personal injury . And there is a resemblance between the legal compensation, as it may be called, and the compensation which an injured person, seeking his own remedy, would be likely to exact for himself . In such a See also:system the two entirely different See also:objects of personal See also:satisfaction and criminal See also:punishment are not clearly separated, and in fact, criminal and See also:civil remedies were administered in the same proceeding . Under See also:modern systems of law, the See also:object of legal compensation is to See also:place the injured person as nearly as possible in the situation in which he would have been but for the injury; and the See also:con-trolling principle is that compensation should be determined so far as possible by the actual amount of the loss sustained . In See also:England, civil proceedings for reparation and criminal proceedings for punishment are with few exceptions carefully kept See also:separate . In See also:Scotland, pursuit of the two kinds of remedies in the same proceeding is possible but very rare; but in See also:France and other See also:European states it is lawful and usual in the case of those delicts which are also punishable criminally . In the law of England the two See also:historical systems of See also:common law and See also:equity viewed compensation or reparation from two different points of view . The principle of the common law was that the amount of every injury might be estimated by pecuniary valuation . The See also:idea was no doubt derived from the old tariffs of were, bot and wile, in which the valuations were elaborate . Until 1858 (See also:Cairns' Act) courts of equity had no See also:direct See also:jurisdiction to See also:award See also:damages, and their business was to place the injured party in the actual position to which he was entitled (restitutio ad integrum) . This difference comes out most clearlyin cases of See also:breach of See also:contract . The common law, with a few partial exceptions, could do no more than compel the defaulter to make See also:good the loss of the other party, by paying him an ascertained sum of See also:money as damages . Equity, recognizing the fact that See also:complete satisfaction was not in all cases to be obtained by See also:mere money See also:payment, compelled those who See also:broke certain classes of contracts specifically to perform them, and in the case of acts or defaults not amounting to breach of contract, on satisfactory See also:proof that a wrong was contemplated, would interfere to prevent it by See also:injunction; while at common law, no See also:action could be brought until the injury was accomplished, and then only pecuniary damages could be obtained . Since the Judicature Acts this distinction has ceased and the appropriate remedy may be awarded in any See also:division of the High See also:Court of See also:Justice . Under the common law damages were always assessed by a See also:jury . Under the existing See also:procedure in England they may be assessed (1) by a jury under the directions of a See also:judge; (2) by a judge alone or sitting with assessors; (3) by a See also:referee, See also:official or See also:special, or officer of the courts with or without the assistance of See also:mercantile or other assessors; (4) by a consensual tribunal such as an arbitrator or valuer selected by the parties . Whatever the mode of See also:assessment, it is subject to See also:review if the assessors have clearly mistaken the proper measure of damage . In the case of assessment by a jury, the See also:verdict may be set aside because the damages are clearly excessive or palpably insufficient, or arrived at by some irregular conduct, e.g. by setting down the sum which each juryman would give and dividing the result by twelve . The appellate court, however, cannot, without the consent of the parties, itself See also:fix the amount of damages in a case which has been submitted to a jury (See also:Watt v . Watt, 1905, See also:Appeal Cases 115) . The courts have gradually evolved certain rules or principles for the proper assessment of damages, although extreme difficulty is found in their application to See also:concrete cases . A distinction is See also:drawn between See also:general and special :See also:ea' damages . (1) General damage is that implied by law damages. as necessarily flowing from the breach of right, and requiring no proof . (2) Special damage is that in fact caused by the wrong . Under existing practice this See also:form of damage cannot be recovered unless it has been specifically claimed and proved, or unless the best available particulars or details have been before trial communicated to the party against whom it is claimed . Contracts.—" The law imposes or implies a See also:term that upon breach of contract damages must be paid." The general tendency of legal decisions in cases of contract is (i.) to make the amount of damages which may be awarded a See also:matter of legal certainty, (ii.) to leave to a jury or like tribunal little more to do than find the facts, (iii.) and to revise the assessment if it is clear that it has been made in disregard of the terms of the contract or of the natural and direct consequences of the breach . The measure of damage, general speaking, is the sum necessary to place the aggrieved party in the same position so far as money will do it as if the contract had been performed . If the breach is proved, but the person complaining has suffered no real damage, he is entitled to have his legal right recognized by an award of what are called nominal damages, i.e. a sum just sufficient to carry a See also:judgment in his favour on the infraction of his rights . Nominal damages, it will therefore be seen, are not the same as " small damages." He is, however, also entitled to prove and recover the special or particular damage lawfully attributable to the breach . Where the contract is to pay a fixed sum of money or liquidated amount, the measure of damages for non-payment is the sum agreed to be paid and See also:interest thereon at the See also:rate stipulated in the contract or recognized by law . The law is the same in Scotland and in France (Civil See also:Code, See also:art . 1153) . In some contracts the parties themselves fix the sum to be paid as damages if the contract is not fulfilled . These damages are described as liquidated, in Scots law stipulated or estimated . It would be supposed that the sum thus fixed would be the proper damages to be awarded . And under the See also:French Civil Code (arts . 1152, 11'53, 1780) the stipulation of the parties as to the damages to be paid for breach of a stipulation other than for paying a sum of money is binding on the courts .. But in England, Scotland and the See also:United States, courts disregard the words used, and inquire into the real nature of the transaction in See also:order to see whether the sum fixed is to be treated as ascertained damage or as a See also:penalty to be held in terrorem over the defaulter, and in the latter case, notwithstanding the stipulation, will require proof of the actual loss . In See also:Kemble v . See also:Farren (1829, 6 See also:Bingham, 141), a contract between a manager and an actor provided that for a breach of any of the stipulations therein, the sum of £See also:I000 should be payable by the defaulter, not as a penalty, but as liquidated and ascertained damages . Yet, the court, observing that under the stipulations of the contract the sum of I000, if it were taken to be liquidated damages, might become payable for mere non-payment of a trifling sum, held that it was not fixed as damages, but as a penalty only . The case in which an agreed sum is most usually treated as a penalty is a See also:bond to pay a fixed sum containing a See also:condition that it shall be void if certain acts are done or a certain smaller sum paid . Another case is where a single lump sum is fixed as the liquidated amount of damage to be paid for doing or failing to do a number of different things of very varying degrees of importance (See also:Elphinstone v . Monkland See also:Iron Co., 1887, 11 A.C . 333) . But the courts have accepted as creating a contractual measure of damage a stipulation to finish See also:sewerage See also:works by a given See also:day (Law v . See also:Redditch See also:Local See also:Board, 1892, 1 Q.B . 127); or to complete See also:torpedo boats within a limited See also:time for a See also:foreign See also:government (See also:Clydebank See also:Engineering Co. v . Yzquierda, 1905, A.C . 6) . In this last case the law lords indicated that the See also:provision of an agreed sum was peculiarly appropriate in view of the difficulty of showing the exact damage which a See also:state sustains by non-delivery of a warship . Where the damage is not liquidated or agreed it is assessed to upon See also:evidence as to the actual loss naturally and directly flowing from the breach of contract . In contracts for the See also:sale of goods the measure of damages is fixed by See also:statute . Where the buyer wrongfully refuses or neglects to accept and pay for, or the seller wrongfully neglects or refuses to deliver the goods, the measure is the estimated loss directly and naturally resulting in the See also:ordinary course of events from the buyer's or seller's breach of contract . Where there is an available See also:market for the goods in question, the measure of damages is prima facie to be ascertained by the difference between the contract See also:price and the market or current price at the time or times when the goods ought to have been accepted or delivered, or if no such time was fixed for See also:acceptance or delivery, then at the time of refusal to accept or deliver (Sale of Goods Act 1893, §§ 50, 51)• Where there is no market, the value is fixed by the price of the nearest available substitute . Where the sufferer, at the See also:request of the person in See also:default, postpones See also:purchase or sale, any in-creased loss thereby caused falls on the defaulter . If the buyer, before the time fixed for delivery, has resold the goods to a sub-vendor, he cannot claim against his own vendor any damages which the sub-vendor may recover against him for breach of contract, because he ought to have gone into the market and See also:purchased other goods . But this is subject to modification in cases falling within the See also:rule in See also:Hadley v . Baxendale (1854, 9 See also:Exchequer, 341) . But trouble and expense incurred by the seller of finding a new purchaser or other goods may be taken See also:account of in assessing the damages . Where the goods delivered are not as contracted the buyer may as a rule See also:sue the seller for a breach of See also:warranty, or set it up as reduction of price . Where the warranty is of quality the loss is prima facie the difference between the value of the goods delivered when delivered and the value which they would have then had if they had answered to the warranty (Sale of Goods Act 1893, § 53) . In an See also:American case, where a person had agreed with a boarding-See also:house keeper for a See also:year, and quitted the house within the time, it was held that the measure of damages was not the price stipulated to be paid, but 'only the loss caused by the breach of contract . In contracts to marry, a special class ofconsiderations is recognized, and the jury in assessing damages will take See also:notice of the conduct of the parties . The social position and means of the See also:defendant may be given in evidence to show what the See also:plaintiff has lost by the breach of contract . On a breach of contract to replace stock See also:lent, the measure of damages is the price of the stock on the day when it ought to have been delivered, or on the day of trial, at the plaintiff's See also:option . In contracts for the sale of realty, the measure of damage for breach by the vendor is the amount of any See also:deposit paid by the would-be purchaser and of the expenses thrown away . But the purchaser may, in a proper case, obtain specific performance, and if he has been cheated may obtain damages in an action for deceit .
Breaches of See also:trust are in a sense distinct from breaches of contract, as they See also:fell under the jurisdiction of courts of equity and not of the common law courts
.
The rule applied was to require a. defaulting trustee to make good to the beneficiaries any loss flowing from a breach of trust and not to allow him to set off against this liability any gain to the trust fund resulting from a different breach of trust or from good management (Lewin on See also:Trusts, ed
.
1904, 1146)
.
In estimating the proper amount to be assessed as damages for a breach of contract, it is not permissible to include every loss caused by the act or default upon which the claim for damages is based
.
The damage to be awarded must be that fairly and naturally arising from the breach under ordinary circumstances or the special circumstances of the particular contract, or in other words, which may reasonably be supposed to have been in the contemplation of the parties at the time of making the contract
.
The See also:chief authority for this rule is the case of Hadley v
.
Baxendale (1854, 9 Exch
.
341), which has been accepted in Scotland and the United States and through-out the See also:British See also:empire, and often differs little, if at all, from the rule adopted in the French civil code (art
.
1150)
.
In that case damages were sought for the loss of profits caused by a See also:steam See also:
But on the other See also:hand, if those special circumstances were wholly unknown to the party breaking the contract, he at the most could only be supposed to have had in his mind the amount of injury which would arise generally, and in the great multitude of cases not affected by any special circumstances, from such breach of contract." L
The rule is, however, only a general See also:guide, and does not obviate the See also:necessity of inquiring in each case what are the natural or contemplated damages
.
In an action by the proprietor of a See also:theatre, it was alleged that the defendant had written a See also:libel on one of the plaintiff's singers, whereby she was
1 In the See also:Indian Contracts Code (Act xii. of 1872), the rule is thus summarized :
" When a contract has been broken, the party who suffers by such breach is entitled to receive from the party who has broken the contract, compensation for any loss or damage caused to him thereby, which naturally arose in the usual course of things from such breach, or which the parties knew when they made the contract to be likely to result from the breach of it
.
Such compensation is not to he given for any remote or indirect loss or damage sustained by reason of the breach
.
.
.
. In estimating the loss or damage arising from a breach of contract, the means of remedying the inconvenience caused by the non-performance must be taken into account " (§ 73)
.
deterred from appearing on the See also:stage, and the plaintiff lost his profits; such loss was held to be too remote to be the ground of an action for damages
.
In Smeed v
.
Foord (1 See also:Ellis and Ellis, 602), the defendant contracted to deliver a threshing-See also:machine to the plaintiff, a See also:farmer, knowing that it was needed to thresh the See also:wheat in the See also: The rule that the contract furnishes the measure of the damages does not prevail in the case of unconscionable, i.e. unreasonable, absurd or impossible contracts . The old school-See also:book juggle in geometrical progression has more than once been before the courts as the ground of an action . Thus, when a See also:man agreed to pay for a See also:horse a See also:barley-See also:corn per See also:nail, doubling it every nail, and the amount calculated as 32 nails was 500 quarters of barley, the judge directed the jury to disregard the contract, and give as damages the value of the horse . And when a defendant had agreed for £5 to give the plaintiff two grains of See also:rye on See also:Monday, four on the next Monday,' and so on doubling it every Monday, it was contended that the contract was impossible, as all the rye in the See also:world would not suffice for it; but one of the See also:judges said that, though foolish, it would hold in law, and the defendant ought to pay something for his folly . And when a man had promised £r000 to the plaintiff if he should find his See also:owl, the jury were directed to mitigate the damages . Interest is recoverable as damages at common law only upon mercantile securities, such as bills of See also:exchange and promissory notes or where a promise to pay interest has been made in See also:express terms or may be implied from the usage of See also:trade or other circumstances [See also:Mayne, Damages (7th ed.) 166] . Under the Civil Procedure Act 1833, the jury is allowed to give interest by way of damages on debts or sums payable at a certain time, or if not so payable, from the date of demand in See also:writing, and in actions on policies of See also:insurance, and in actions of See also:tort arising out of See also:conversion or seizure of goods . In the United States, interest is in the discretion of the court, and is made to depend on the equity of the case . In both England and See also:America See also:compound interest, or interest on interest, appears to have been regarded with the horror that formerly attached to See also:usury . See also:Lord See also:Eldon would not recognize as valid an agreement to pay compound interest . And See also:Chancellor See also:Kent held that compound interest could not be taken except upon a special agreement made after the See also:simple interest became due . In Scotland compound interest is not allowed by way of damages .
Torts.-In actions arising otherwise than from breach of contract (i.e. of tort, delict or quasi-delict), the principles applied to the assessment of damage in cases arising ex conlractu are generally applicable (The Notting See also: In the case of injuries to the person caused by negligence, the tribunal considers, as See also:part of the general damage, the actual See also:pain and suffering, including See also:nervous See also:shock (but not wounded feelings) and the permanent or temporary character of the injury, and as special damage the loss of time and employment during recovery and the cost of cure . It is difficult by any arithmetical calculation to value pain and suffering; nor is it easy to value the effect of a permanent injury; and in the Workmen's Compensation Act and Employers' Liability Act, an See also:attempt has been made in the case of workmen to assess by reference to the earnings of the injured person . In the case of such wrongs as See also:assault, See also:arrest or See also:prosecution, the motives of the defendant naturally affect the amount of general damage awarded, even when not essential elements in the case, and the damages are " at large." Any other rule would enable a man to distribute blows as he can utter curses at a statutory See also:tariff of so much a curse, according to his See also:rank . This position was strongly asserted in the cases arising out of the celebrated " General Warrants " (1763) in the time of Lord See also:Camden, who is reported in one case to have said, " damages are designed not only as a satisfaction to the injured person, but as a punishment to the guilty, and as a proof of the detestation in which the wrongful act is held by the jury." In another case he mentioned the importance of the question at issue, the attempt to exercise arbitrary See also:power, as a reason why the jury might give exemplary damages . Another judge, in another case, said " I remember a case when the jury gave £50o damages for knocking a man's See also:hat off; and the court refused a new trial." And he urged that exemplary damages for personal insult would tend to prevent the practice of duelling . The right to give exemplary or punitive or (as they are some-times called) vindictive damages is fully recognized both in England and in the United States, and especially in the following cases . (1) Against the co-See also:respondent in a See also:divorce suit . This right is the same as that recognized at common law in the abolished action of criminal conversation, but the damages awarded may by the court be applied for the See also:maintenance and See also:education of the See also:children of the See also:marriage or the maintenance of the offending wife . (2) In actions of trespass to See also:land where the conduct of the defendant has been outrageous . (3) In actions of See also:defamation spoken or written, attended by circumstances of aggravation, and the analogous action of malicious prosecution . (4) In the anomalous actions of See also:seduction and breach of promise of marriage . In actions for wrongs, as in those ex conlractu, the damages may be general or special . In a few cases of tort, the action fails wholly if special damage is not proved, e.g. See also:slander by imputing to a man vicious, unchaste or immoral conduct, slander of See also:title to land or goods or See also:nuisance . In theory, See also:English law does not recognize " moral or intellectual " damage, such as was claimed by the See also:South See also:African See also:Republic after the See also:Jameson See also:Raid . The law of Scotland allows a solatium for wounded feelings, as does French law under the name of dommage moral, eprouve See also:par la partie lesee Bans sa liberte, sa sdrete, son honneur, sa See also:consideration, ses affections legitimes ou dans la jouissance de son patrimoine . Under this See also:head compensation is awarded to widow, child or See also:sister, for the loss of See also:husband, See also:parent or See also:brother, in addition to the actual pecuniary loss (Dalloz, Nouveau Code civil, art . 1382) . Claims of damage for negligence are defeated by proof of what is known as contributory negligence (faute See also:commune) . In other claims of tort, as already stated, the conduct of the claimant may materially reduce the amount of his damages . In cases of damages to See also:ships or See also:cargo by collision at See also:sea, the rule of the old court of See also:admiralty (derived from the civil law and preserved by the Judicature Acts) is that when both or all vessels are to blame, the whole amount of the loss is divided between them . The rule appears not to apply to cases where See also:death or personal injury results from the collision (" See also:Vera Cruz," 1884, 14 A.C . 59 . " Bernina," 1888, 13 A.C . 1) . See also:Costs.—The costs of a legal proceeding are no longer treated as damages to be assessed by the jury, nor do they depend on any act of the jury . The right to receive them depends on the court, and they are taxed or assessed by its See also:officers (see COSTS) . In a few cases where costs cannot be given, e.g. on compulsory acquisition of land in See also:London, the assessing tribunal is invited to add to the compensation price the owner's expense in the compensation proceedings . Death.—In English law a right to recover damages for a tort as a general rule was lost on the death of the sufferer or of the delinquent . The cause of action was considered not to survive . This rule differs from that of Scots law (under which the claim for damages arises at the moment of injury and is not affected by the death of either party) . The English rule has been criticized as barbarous, and has been considerably broken in upon by legislation, in cases of taking the goods of another (4 Edw . III., c . 7, 1330), and injuries to real or personal property (3 & 4 Will . IV., c . 42, 1833), but continues in force as to such matters as defamation, malicious prosecution and trespass to the person . By the Fatal Accidents Act 1846 (commonly called Lord See also:Camp-See also:bell's Act), it is enacted that wherever a wrongful act would have entitled the injured person to recover damages (if death had not ensued), the person who in such case would have been liable " shall be liable to an action for damages for the pecuniary loss which the death has caused to certain persons, and although the death shall have been caused under such circumstances as amount in law to See also:felony." The only persons by whom or for whose benefit such an action may be brought are the husband, wife, parent and child (including grandchild and stepchild, but not illegitimate child) of the deceased . The right of action and the measure of damages are statutory and distinct from the right which the deceased had till he died . It was held in See also:Osborne v . Gillett, 1873, L.R . 8 Ex . 88, and has since been approved (See also:Clark v . London General See also:Omnibus Co., 1906, 2 K.B . 648), that no person can recover damages for the death of another wrongfully killed by the act of a third person, unless he claims through or represents the person killed, and unless that person in case of an injury See also:short of death would have had a good claim to recover damages . In Scotland the law of compensation for breach of contract is substantially the same as in England . In cases of delict or quasidelict, the measure of reparation is a See also:fair and reasonable compensation for the See also:advantage which the sufferer would, but for the wrong, have enjoyed and has lost as a natural and proximate result of the wrong, coupled with a solatium for wounded feelings . The claim for reparation vests as a See also:debt when it arises and survives to the representatives of the sufferer, and against the representatives of the delinquent . In other words, the See also:maxim See also:echo personalis moritur cum persona does not apply in Scots law; and even in cases of See also:murder there has always been recognized a right to " assythement." See also Mayne on Damages, 7th ed.; See also:Sedgwick on Damage; Bell, Principles of Law of Scotland . (W . F . |
|
|
[back] DAMAGED BY |
[next] DAMANHUR |
There are no comments yet for this article.
Do not copy, download, transfer, or otherwise replicate the site content in whole or in part.
Links to articles and home page are encouraged.