The buyer suppied a food formula to a food mixer and claimed damages when the food mix injured his mink. The defendant argued that the level of damages sought exceeded that expectations of the parties when the contract was entered into.
Held: The fact that the extent of the loss occasioned by a breach was greater than anticipated by the parties when entering into the contract is not relevant when assessing whether the damages are claimable. The test for remoteness does not require the claimant to show that contract breaker ought to have contemplated as being not unlikely the actual extent of the loss that occurred. The court is entitled to look at: ‘such knowledge and information as (the contract breaker), as reasonable men, experienced in its trade, should have had and should have brought to bear in its contemplation.’
Davies LJ said: ‘the party who has suffered damage does not have to show that the contract breaker ought to have contemplated as being not unlikely, the precise detail of the damage or the precise manner of its happening. It is enough if he should have contemplated damage of that kind is not unlikely.’
Davies LJ
[1969] 3 All ER 1496
Sale of Goods Act 1893 14(1)
England and Wales
Cited by:
Appeal from – Christopher Hill Ltd v Ashington Piggeries Ltd HL 1972
Mink farmers had asked a compounder of animal foods to make up mink food to a supplied formula.
Held: There was reliance as to the suitability of the ingredients only.
Lord Diplock said: ‘Unless the Sale of Goods Act 1893 is to be allowed . .
Cited – Transfield Shipping Inc of Panama v Mercator Shipping Inc of Monrovia ComC 1-Dec-2006
The owners made substantial losses after the charterers breached the contract by failing to redliver the ship on time as agreed.
Held: On the facts found the Owners’ primary claim is not too remote. To the knowledge of the Charterers, it was . .
Cited – Shah and Another v HSBC Private Bank (UK) Ltd QBD 26-Jan-2009
The claimants sought damages after delays by the bank in processing transfer requests. The bank said that the delays were made pending reports of suspected criminal activity. The bank’s delay had stigmatised the claimant causing further losses. The . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Contract, Damages
Leading Case
Updated: 01 November 2021; Ref: scu.246739
