Term
| Livingstone v Rawyards Coal Co |
|
Definition
à Lord Blackburn à ‘the sum of money which will put the party who has been injured, or who has suffered, in the same position as he would have been in if he had not sustained the wrong for which he is now getting his compensation’. (as if the tort didn’t happen; pre-tort position) |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
Established restrictions on the ways where you can use punitive damages, allowing for three categories. The aim of tort law is not to punish, but to award damages so this is not typical;
1. Oppressive, arbitrary of unconstitutional action by the servants of the government. Here the defendant is penalized for the abuse of executive power.
2. Conduct calculated to make a profit in excess of any compensation payable (‘cause of action’ test). This means that the defendant knows that they are carrying out a wrong, and some compensation will be paid but the economic gain will be excessive of any compensation payable. To teach the defendant that tort does not pay, but also to deprive them of the fruits of their tort.
3. Authorised by statue
|
|
|
Term
| AB v South West Water Services |
|
Definition
| In this case it was highlighted that you not only need to fit with these three categories, but also there is a second hurdle where you need to establish a cause of action. When you’re claiming expansionary damages, they have to fall within a category that already exists. This is to say that when the exemplary damages haven’t been awarded, they cannot be awarded now. If you are trying to claim for exemplary damages they need to fit within an already existing category of exemplary damages. |
|
|
Term
| Kuddus v CC Leicestershire [2001] |
|
Definition
Here the claimant told a police constable that he came back to his flat where he let his friend stay, to find out that his friend has stolen a lot of property. The police officer said that the matter would be investigated, but some months later the police officer forged the signature of the claimant on a witness statement, which allowed him to close the file. The police officer admitted forgery, which was an abuse of the public office, but said that he shouldn’t give punitive damages. The HOL held that there was a viable claim for aggregated damages instead, and perhaps punitive damages should be restrictive to the wrongful arrest and false imprisonment. The courts are not too willing to give |
|
|
Term
| Richardson v Howie [2004] |
|
Definition
The COA said that aggravated damages serve to some degree to compensate, injury to feelings, but only in exceptional cases should you get a separate award for aggravated damages |
|
|
Term
| Thompson Metropolitan Police Commissioner |
|
Definition
It was held that aggravated damages will be awarded at the discretion of the court but these will be moderate. |
|
|
Term
| Constantine v Imperial Hotels |
|
Definition
| A well known cricket player came to stay at the Imperial Hotel. He asked to stay at the hotel and they had sufficient rooms for him, and he was willing to pay for everything. He was of good character, but he was black. They refused to let him stay. What level of damages should he recieve? This case didn’t require a proof of special damage. What remedy should he be given? It was said that he did suffer a lot of humiliation and stress but there was no injury. He was awarded 5 guiness. |
|
|
Term
| Hicks v Chief Constable of South Yorkshire |
|
Definition
Two sisters that were crushed in the Hilburn disaster (father brought a claim in). It was said that the girls died after five minutes, and they wouldn’t have been able to suffer that level of anticipation that their life expectancy was reduced. Even if there were damages they would only be awarded for 5 minutes and wouldn’t be a big sum. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| The claimant was injured in a car accident and was left paralysed because of it. Due to the severe injuries, her ability to understand the injuries were limited. The HOL said that there was a loss of amenity, and she would never improve as she needed a constant care and attention. Her life expectancy was not lowered, her quality of life was just lowered. A sum was given to her for that. |
|
|
Term
| Pickett v British Rail Engineering |
|
Definition
| Here the loss of earnings should be allowed especially when you consider the dependence involved. This is especially true when other people are dependent on this (ie families with children) |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
Look at the life expectancy for the person before the accident occurs. Certain things are taken into account such as smoking. |
|
|
Term
| Hussain v Taplow Paper Mills |
|
Definition
If you have already retired and are receiving a pension this is not receiving benefit twice as pensions are a form of insurance. |
|
|
Term
| Shelfer v City of London Electric Lighting |
|
Definition
should compensation be given rather than an injunction?
ü it would be oppressive to the defendant to grant an injunction. |
|
|
