-I&I

LAW OF CONTRACT
228
consequences but for
not awarded for the remote proximate
arc
consequences only. caused by brcach of
Nominal damages.-If there is no real loss damaros
(5) nominal
contract, the court can order the party in default to pay
(6) Exemplary, punitive or vindictive damages.--Exemplary,
vindictive damages are not awarded by way of Just compensation waw
punitive or
suffering harm but for the purpose of deterrence by
to the person follow the Same course of action
punishment so that the others may not and r
confused with the penal provisions
Such damages are sometimestort-feasor. Such damages are awarded when
generally awarded against a
have been oppressive, arbitrary and
the act of the Government servants is to derive the proft
unconstitutional ' or when the defendant's conduct
compensation which can be paid to the
cxcceding much in proportion to under the statute." Exemplary
plaintiff or when there is express provision lesson to the wron gdoer.
damages are awarded just to teach the
(7) Prospective damages,Thesewhich are damages which arise in future
of is in future. For example. in
due to the present incident the effect defendant, the plaintiff is deprived of
case of a breach of contract by the installation of which, he could have
installing a machinery and by the parties, that no such machinery
carned huge profits and it is known to the years in case the defendant fails
will be available for a period of next five
a tort arising out of an accident,
to supply it at present. Similarly in case of affecting his future prospects.
the plaintiff becomes handicappedcalculatedadversely
damages are on the basis of loss which are
In such cases, the
prospective in nature.
suffered loss due to breach
In a breach of contract, the party which has
of contract by the other party is entitled from to claim damages. Damages are
the breach of contract. If
awardcd if the damages or loss results contract, the damages are
damage is too remote resulting from the breach of
not awarded.
had their mill at
English law.--In Hadley v. Baxendale, the plaintiffs steam-engine, the mill
Gloucester. Due to breakage of crank-shaft ofthetheir shaft to Joyce & Co. at
send
was stopped. It became necessary to plaintiffs sent one of their servants
Greenwich for making a new one. The carrying shaft to Grecnwich. The
to Pickford & Co., well known carriers, for stopped and the shaft should be
servant told the carriers that the mill was answer if the shaft was sent to
sent immediately. The servant was told in delivered on the following day
them by 12 O'clock on any day, it would be defendants and the carriage
to Joyee & Co. The shaft was delivered to the
was charged. The defendants' clerk was told to make
for the whole distance
a special entry if required to hasten delivery delivery to Joyce & Co. Due to the
negligence of the defendants, the of the shaft was delayed.
Consequently, the plaintiffs did not receive the shaft 300 for several days. The
mill remained stopped and they estimated a loss of£ due to working o
defendants for ths
the mill having been delayed. The plaintiffs sued the
sug
1. Rookes v. Barnard, (1964) AC 1129 at 1226 : (1964) 1 All ER 367; Bhim
State of Jammu and Kushmir. AR 1986 SC 494.
2. Ibid; Bell y. Midland Rail Co.. (1861) 10 CB (NS) 287.
3. Thid, at p 1227.
4. (1854) 9 Exch. 341.
 BREACH OF CONTRACT 229
o08 The defendants opposed it on the ground that the
romote.
damages were ton
Alderson, B. obscrved :
"Now we
this :Where think the propcr
two partics have rule in such a case as
has broken, the damages made a contract whichtheonepresent of
is
which the other party ought to them
respect of such brcach of contract receive in
reasonably considered either as arising
be should be such as may fairly and
to the usual course of things, from such naturally, i.e., according
brcach of contract itself, or
such as may reasonably be
contemplation supposcd
of the parties, at the time to have been in the
the probable result of the they made the contract, as
brcach of it. Now, if the
circumstances under which the contract was actually madespecial
communicated by the plaintiffs to the defendants,and thus knownwereto
both parties, the damages
resulting from the breach of such a
contract, which they would reasonably
amount of injury which would ordinarilycontemplate,
follow
would be the
contract under these special from a breach of
communicated. But on the other hand, circumstances
if these special
SO known and

were wholly unknown to the party

breaking the circumstances
most, could only be supposed to have had in his contract, he, at the
amount of injury which would arise contemplation the
multitude of cases not affected by any generally, and in the great
such a breach of contract. For, had thespecial circumstances, from
known, the partics might have specially special provided
circumstances
for the
been
contract by special terms as to the damage in that case; breach of
advantage it would be very unjust to deprive them." and of this
Applying the above-stated principle the court said that
known to the carriers was that the plaintiffs were the millers and only thing
shaft must be delivered to the Joyee & Co. but broken
show that the profits of the mill these circumstances did not
the delivery of the broken shaft. would
The
be stopped by unreasonable delay in
or at the time of delivering the shaft millers might have had another shaft
to the carriers, the
have been defective in some other respect. machinery might
Although, actually
plaintiff was in this case due to unreasonable delay by the the loss to the
& Co. yet the
circumstances that there would be loss ofcarriers profit
to Joyee
due to
unreasonable delay in delivery of the shaft was never
defendants. communicated to the
The decision laid down the law of two
(1) General, and
types of damages
(2) Special damages.
General Damages,-General damages are those
n the natural course from the breach of contract. Suchwhich arise usually
damages are those
which can be reasonably
Special Damages, foreseen.
Special damages are those which arise due to
special
the circumst
special ances
in a breach of
circumstances
contract. They are recoverable only
were brought to the party committing the breach
contract or in other words, if the special circumstances were in
Contemplation of both the parties. the