Damages: awarded to compensate the innocent party. Damages can be awarded for normal loss suffered because of the breach, damages for inconvenience and in some circumstances for abnormal loss to put the innocent party in the position they would have been had the contract been carried out but the party who breached must be aware of the special circumstances. If a contract is breached the aggrieved party is still expected to take reasonable steps to minimize the loss. This can be seen in Gunter v Lauritzen 1894 where Gunter entered into a contract to buy straw from Lauritzen to resell for profit, however, Gunter rejected the straw based on quality and sued for the lost profit despite not trying to purchase the straw elsewhere. Gunter was successful due to the limited...
Damages: awarded to compensate the innocent party. Damages can be awarded for normal loss suffered because of the breach, damages for inconvenience and in some circumstances for abnormal loss to put the innocent party in the position they would have been had the contract been carried out but the party who breached must be aware of the special circumstances. If a contract is breached the aggrieved party is still expected to take reasonable steps to minimize the loss. This can be seen in Gunter v Lauritzen 1894 where Gunter entered into a contract to buy straw from Lauritzen to resell for profit, however, Gunter rejected the straw based on quality and sued for the lost profit despite not trying to purchase the straw elsewhere. Gunter was successful due to the limited supplies available and the difficulty in obtaining the same amount elsewhere. Another factor which can limit damages is the remoteness of damage and the person in breach is only liable for those losses which are reasonably foreseeable as seen in Hadley v Baxendale 1845, Hadley, a mill owner had engaged Baxendale to carry a broken driving shaft to the makers in another county, so they could use the pattern to make a new part. The delivery was delayed beyond the reasonable time and Hadley sued for damages as well as lost profits during the time of the delay. The court held that Hadley had not communicated this to Baxendale who may well have assumed he had a spare therefore it was not reasonably foreseeable for him to have anticipated the loss of profits as this was too remote.
Retention if one party has breached the contract then the other can hold off on their contractual obligations
Lien The aggrieved party can retain the property of the party in breach provided it is already in their possession until the other party fulfills their contractual obligations. This can be seen in car garages where the garage does not release a car until the bill has been settled.
Specific implement A court can grant this if the contract is unique, original or sentimental to ensure the party in breach fulfills its contractual obligations.
Interdict can be used by the court to prevent an action which will result in a breach of contract.
Recession or withdrawal from contract provided the breach is material to the contract as shown above in Wade V Walden.
