| 正文 |
Question：In Hadley v Baxendale (1854) the defendant was sued for breach of contract because he had taken too long to deliver a repaired mill-shaft.
Which three of the following principles were decided by the court when ruling on the amount of damages the mill owner could recover?
A. The defendant must have been aware of any special circumstances.
B. Owners should insure against slow delivery.
C. Any losses suffered can be recovered.
D. The parties could have anticipated the manner of the loss when making the contract.
E. The loss must arise naturally from the breach.
The correct answers are: The loss must arise naturally from the breach; The parties could have anticipated the manner of the loss when making the contract; The defendant must have been aware of any special circumstances.
解析：This is the key case on remoteness of damage and establishes the principle that, in most cases, the damages claimed must have arisen naturally from the breach and it was possible for the parties to have anticipated them at the time the contract was made.
In the case of unusual losses (as in this case), the claimant will only succeed if the defendant had been made aware of the special circumstances at the same time.
The availability of insurance is never relevant.
|
| 导航大图 | |
| 责任编辑 | |
| 导语 | |
| 大标题 | |
| 标题一 | |
| 标题二 | |
| 标题三 | |
| 标题四 |
相关热点：
上一篇：上一篇：ACCA F3模拟题：有形的非流动资产
下一篇：下一篇：ACCA F5模拟题：标准成本计算和方差分析
