header-logo header-logo

Gain without pain?

15 April 2010 / Jonathan Pratt , Matthew Mccahearty
Issue: 7413 / Categories: Features , Commercial
printer mail-detail

Matthew McCahearty & Jonathan Pratt applaud the flexibility of Wrotham Park damages

Damages for breach of contract are normally measured by reference to the innocent party’s financial loss; the intention being to put that party in the position it would have been in, had the contract been properly performed. When damages are calculated on that basis, a claimant who has not suffered a loss will only be entitled to nominal damages.

However, there is a growing line of authority which provides for damages to be assessed by reference to the price of a release from the obligation which the defendant has breached, following a hypothetical negotiation between a willing buyer and a willing seller. This measure of damages is often referred to as Wrotham Park damages after the case of Wrotham Park Estate Company Limited v Parkside Homes Limited [1974] 1 WLR 798.

In Pell Frischmann Engineering Ltd v Bow Valley Iran Ltd & Others (Rev 2) [2009] UKPC 45, the Privy Council awarded Wrotham Park damages for breach of a confidentiality

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll