You are on page 1of 15

Direct loss

Definition: Direct loss is loss arising naturally, according to the usual course of things, from the breach of contract itself, and is therefore foreseeable and recoverable.

Explanation :
In estimating the loss or damage arising from a breach of contract, the means which existed of remedying the inconvenience caused by non-performance of the contract must be taken into account.

Example of direct loss


Two parties A and B enter into a contract for the sale of an antique doll for 5,000. A (the seller) finds out that B (the Buyer) intends to re-sell doll to a collector for a 10% profit. A breaches the contract and sells the doll to the collector; antique value at time of breach is Rs 6,000. The Compensatory Damages equals Rs1000 (60005000). The Consequential damages equals Rs 500 (5000x.10).

A contracts to buy of B, at a stated price, 50 maunds of rice, no time being fixed for delivery. A afterwards informs B that he will not accept the rice if tendered to him. B is entitled to receive from A, by way of compensation, the amount, if any, by which the contract price exceeds that which B can obtain for the rice at the time when A informs B that he will not accept it. A contracts to buy Bs ship for 60,000 rupees, but breaks his promise. A must pay to B, by way of compensation, the excess, if any, of the contract price over the price which B can obtain for the ship at the time of the breach of promise.

Indirect
Definition: Indirect loss is loss that arises from a special circumstance of the case and is recoverable if it may reasonably be supposed to have been in the consideration of the parties at the time they made the contract, as the probable consequence of the breach. In other words, if the party in breach of contract was aware of the special circumstances of the other party when the contract was entered into, the losses may be recoverable.

Indirect loss is also called as consequential loss that does not arise naturally

Examples
Loss of revenue: if A sold a factory to B the factory is default system condition damages occur due to fault .The contract is breeched by A so the court will award compensation that due to default system some direct and in direct loses occur. Loss of goodwill: Rahat controversies

Case 1
Ahamed and Co. Barristers incorporation acting through its manager operation Sadaf rashidplantiff Vs Mr muneeb ahmed haqani Defendant Suit for recovery of Rs 700000 Legal services especially relating to united kingdom immigration law . The above titled suit is being filed through its manager operation , who is well versed with the facts of the case

judgement
The plaintiff has claimed an amount of Rs 700000/. Which as per Para no 3 of the plaint, defendant agreed to pay in installment i.e. first installment of Rs 500000/-, on issuance of hsmp visa and second installment of 200000 payable with in 10 months after issuance of visa .The plaintiff has not produce even a single piece of paper to prove that professional fee of Rs 700000/- was ever agreed between two parties

Indirect loss to a company Not recoverable because the consideration are not taken between the parties at the time they made the contract The company was un aware of the consequences so they will bear the profit loss

Case no 2
Muhammad afzal stenographer..petitioner Versus Learned civil judge (west) Islamabad Estate officer ,Islamabad, Shaheed-e-milat secretariat Mr.anwar khan son of hassan wali ..respondents

Judgement
Civil rvision under section act 115 of the code of civil procedure, 1908 against order passed on an application for impleading as party under rule 10 of order 1.The learned respondent no 1 (learned civil judge) allowed Ex parte and with out hearing the petitioner an application for impleading the respondent no 4.the fasts are about allotment and occupation against natural justice,with out giving rights of audience in the matter

Both direct and Indirect loss Naturaly arising of the fact that the petioner was not heard and the decision was taken. Indirect that the allotment was given to other by any hearing by the judge

Case 3
Syed fakher e alam appellant Versus Muhammad amin akhtar Quaid e azam university, islamabad Federal government employees

judgment
Compromise on selling of plot The bargain of suit plot between the plantiff and defendant was made on payment of 620000. Orally decided Payment 500000Rs /-