(High Court of Australia) In a claim for damages for breach of contract, wasted expenditure was claimed and there was a complex dispute as to what the consequences of performing the contract would have been.
Held: The law should not, when assessing damages, adopt an all-or-nothing balance of probability approach, and assume certainty where none in truth exists.
Mason CJ, Brennan, Deane, Dawson, Toohey, Gaudron and McHugh JJ
(1991) 66 ALJR 12, [1991] HCA 54, (1992) 174 CLR 64
Austlii
Australia
Cited by:
Cited – Gregg v Scott HL 27-Jan-2005
The patient saw his doctor and complained about a lump under his arm. The doctor failed to diagnose cancer. It was nine months before treatment was begun. The claimant sought damages for the reduction in his prospects of disease-free survival for . .
Cited – Omak Maritime Ltd v Mamola Challenger Shipping Co Ltd ComC 4-Aug-2010
Lost Expenses as Damages for Contract Breach
The court was asked as to the basis in law of the principle allowing a contracting party to claim, as damages for breach, expenditure which has been wasted as a result of a breach. The charterer had been in breach of the contract but the owner had . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Damages
Updated: 21 December 2021; Ref: scu.222469
