A court may award symbolic damages as relief for breach of contract if the plaintiff is unable to substantiate its claim for damages. In the case of symbolic damages, the court recognizes that there has been a breach of contract, but no damage can be calculated. There are several common remedies for breach of contract. The appropriate remedy depends on the terms of the contract, the nature of the breach and the particular circumstances of the case. Financial damages, as well as injunctive relief, are most commonly used in the United States. Like the United States, British courts tend to award financial damages in tort cases. However, punitive damages are not applicable in the legal systems of the United Kingdom and Japan or in contractual cases in Australia and have a limited but broad scope in the People`s Republic of China. In European countries, the nature of remedies, including the type and amount of damages, is determined on a case-by-case basis by factors such as the place where the unlawful conduct caused damage. The enforcement of remedies can be difficult in international disputes, as the law of one jurisdiction does not apply to another. [5] Because of their historical origins, monetary damages are often referred to as remedies, while coercive and declaratory remedies are referred to as equitable remedies. There are three distinct categories of remedies in common law systems.
The remedy originates in the English courts and takes the form of a monetary payment to the victim, commonly referred to as damages or repletive. The purpose of compensation is to repair the harm caused to the victim by a party in violation. In the history of the English legal system, the remedy existed only in the form of financial compensation, and the victim must therefore apply to a separate system if he or she wishes other forms of compensation. Although courtrooms and proceedings have been integrated, the distinction between monetary claims and measures still exists. [6] Non-monetary compensation refers to the second category of judicial remedies, equitable remedies. This type of action stems from the equitable jurisdiction developed by the English Court of Chancery and the Court of Exchequer. Declaratory actions are the third category of judicial remedies. Unlike the other two categories, declaratory actions generally involve a court determining how the law is to be applied to certain facts without the parties ordering it. [7] Courts provide reasons for deciding many types of issues, including whether a person has legal status, who owns property, whether a law has a particular meaning, or what rights exist under a contract. [7] While these are three basic categories of common law remedies, there are also a handful of others (such as the Reformation and the Resignation, both of which relate to treaties whose terms must be rewritten or reversed). If a party is a victim of fraud, it must act expeditiously to repeal the common law or lose its right and its remedy will be limited to tortious damages.
(This issue is discussed in more detail in Section 16.5.7 “Choice of Solutions.”) The only explanation for the differences between law and justice is to be found in the history and politics of England in the twelfth century, but in practical terms the differences are remarkable. First, juries are not used only in cases. Second, justice is based less on precedent than on the sense that justice must be done. Third, and most importantly, when what is sought by the non-offending party is not money – that is, if there is no adequate remedy – fairness can provide redress. In equity, a person may induce a judge to order the offending party to deliver real property or refrain from doing something they should not do, or to return consideration given by the non-offending party to restore the parties to a pre-contractual status (specific performance, injunction or restitution). n. the means of obtaining justice in all cases where legal rights are at stake. Appeals may be ordered by the court by judgment after hearing or by agreement (settlement) between the person claiming the damage and the person he believes to have caused it, as well as by automatic application of the law.
Some remedies require that certain actions be taken or prohibited (originally referred to as “fairness”); others involve the payment of a sum of money to cover losses due to breaches or breaches of contract; And still others require a declaration of the parties` rights by a court and an order to respect them. An “extraordinary remedy” is a means used by a judge to resolve certain issues, such as the appointment of an arbitrator, prothonotary or liquidator, to investigate, report or take possession of property. An “interim remedy” is a temporary solution to keep things in the status quo until a final decision has been made or attempts are made to see if the remedy will work. On appeal, Britly argued that the damage was not foreseeable, since EBWS was not contractually or legally obliged to purchase milk or pay its employees. EBWS counters that it is common knowledge that cows continue to produce milk even if the processing plant is not functioning and that it is therefore foreseeable that this loss would occur. We conclude that these damages are not the foreseeable consequence of Britly`s breach of the construction contract and cancel the award. The third type of equitable legal protection is restitution. Restitution is a remedy applicable to different types of cases: those where the contract was avoided due to lack of competence or misrepresentation, those where the other party breached, and those where the party seeking restitution breached. As the word implies, restitution is a return of what it has given to the other party. Consequently, compensation can only be awarded to the injured party to the extent that the injured party has provided a service to the other party.