Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Liquidated damages, also referred to as liquidated and ascertained damages (LADs), [1] are damages whose amount the parties designate during the formation of a contract [2] for the injured party to collect as compensation upon a specific breach (e.g., late performance). [3] This is most applicable where the damages are intangible.
Incidental damages are the expenses reasonably incurred by a non-breaching party in order to avoid further consequential or direct damages that result from the breach of contract. For example, following the breach of a contract for employment, incidental damages could include the cost incurred by the former employee to find another job. [6]
Liquidated damages; Liquidated damages refer to a predetermined amount of money that must be paid by the breaching party, and they are fixed numbers agreed upon by both parties during the formation of a contract. Courts enforcing a liquidated damages provision would consider the reasonableness of its amount, specifically if it approximates the ...
Specific performance is an equitable remedy in the law of contract, in which a court issues an order requiring a party to perform a specific act, such as to complete performance of a contract. [1]
Example. In Attorney General v Blake, [25] an English court found itself faced with the following claim. The defendant had made a profit somewhere in the region of £60,000 as a direct result of breaching his contract with the claimant. The claimant was undoubtedly entitled to claim compensatory damages but had suffered little or no ...
Under common law, a liquidated damages clause will not be enforced if the purpose of the term is solely to punish a breach (in this case it is termed penal damages). [23] The clause will be enforceable if it involves a genuine attempt to quantify a loss in advance and is a good faith estimate of economic loss.
The court may "declare the contract subsisting" and award damages in lieu of rescission, but s.2(3) prevents the award of double damages. Fraudulent misrepresentation is defined in the 3-part test in Donohoe v Donohoe , where the defendant Donohoe was categorically declared completely fraudulent as he:
The filing of a declaratory judgment lawsuit can follow the sending by one party of a cease-and-desist letter to another party. [6] A party contemplating sending such a letter risks that the recipient, or a party related to the recipient (i.e. such as a customer or supplier), may file for a declaratory judgment in their own jurisdiction, or sue for minor damages in the law of unjustified threats.