Rethinking the Law of Contract Damages
Show Less

Rethinking the Law of Contract Damages

Victor P. Goldberg

In this series of chapters on contract damages issues, Victor P. Goldberg provides a framework for analyzing the problems that arise when determining damages, and applies it to case law in both the USA and the UK.
Buy Book in Print
Show Summary Details
You do not have access to this content

Chapter 2: After The Golden Victory: still lost at sea

Victor P. Goldberg

Abstract

In The Golden Victory the House of Lords held that when determining damages for a repudiatory breach, in a conflict between the compensatory principle and finality, the former trumped. The decision was ratified by the Supreme Court in Bunge SA v. Nidera BV. This was a mistake; properly conceived, there is no conflict. The contract should be viewed as an asset and compensation would entail determining the decline in value of that asset at the time of the breach. The value of the contract at that moment would reflect the possible effects of future events (e.g., the occurrence of the Gulf War in The Golden Victory and the lifting of the Russian wheat embargo in Bunge). This does not mean rejection of the compensatory principle; it simply entails defining more precisely what is being compensated-the value of the contract at the moment it had been repudiated.

You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.

Elgaronline requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals. Please login through your library system or with your personal username and password on the homepage.

Non-subscribers can freely search the site, view abstracts/ extracts and download selected front matter and introductory chapters for personal use.

Your library may not have purchased all subject areas. If you are authenticated and think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.


Further information

or login to access all content.