Nurse v. Barnes: Difference between revisions
From wikilawschool.net. Wiki Law School does not provide legal advice. For educational purposes only.
(Created page with "{{Infobox Case Brief |citation=Sir T. Rayam 77 (1664) |date=1664 |subject=Contracts }} '''Facts''' For 10 pounds, the plaintiff was allowed to enjoy the defendant’s iron...") |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
'''Facts''' | '''Facts''' | ||
For 10 pounds, the plaintiff was allowed to | For 10 pounds, the plaintiff was allowed to use the defendant’s iron mills for six months. The defendant evidently violated the contract. | ||
| Line 21: | Line 21: | ||
'''Reasoning''' | '''Reasoning''' | ||
When a party incurs a loss based on another’s failed contractual obligation, that offending party should be held liable. | When a party incurs a loss based on another’s failed contractual obligation, that offending party should be held liable. Damages may exceed the value of the original consideration. | ||
Revision as of 03:42, March 8, 2020
| Nurse v. Barnes | |
| Court | |
|---|---|
| Citation | Sir T. Rayam 77 (1664) |
| Date decided | 1664 |
Facts
For 10 pounds, the plaintiff was allowed to use the defendant’s iron mills for six months. The defendant evidently violated the contract.
Issues
Whether the plaintiff could be entitled to special damages amounting to more than the contract was worth.
Holding/Decision
The jury awarded damages in the amount of 500 pounds, because they found the plaintiff was due the amount of the contract as well as value of stock laid in the contract.
Reasoning
When a party incurs a loss based on another’s failed contractual obligation, that offending party should be held liable. Damages may exceed the value of the original consideration.
