Edited by Roger Halson and David Campbell
Chapter 6: The limitations on reliance damages for breach of contract
This chapter discusses some contentious issues relating to the recovery of so-called ‘reliance damages’ in an action for breach of contract. Does the commonly expressed ‘presumption of recoupment’ relating to expenditure incurred by the claimant in performing, or preparing to perform, the contract impose the full legal burden or merely an evidential burden on the defendant of proving that the expenditure would not have been recovered? Assuming that the former is correct, should the ability of the defendant to rebut the presumption be affected by the existence of foreseeable consequential benefits that the claimant expected or hoped to gain from performance of the contract? Does the presumption extend to all types of expenditure incurred in reliance on the contract? Should account be taken of contingencies that, if they had eventuated, would have enabled the defendant to escape or reduce liability in damages? And are damages for both wasted expenditure and loss profits recoverable in a case where the claimant is able to establish that performance by the defendant would have resulted in a net gain.
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.