Remoteness in english law is a set of rules in both tort and contract, which limits the amount of compensatory damages for a wrong in negligence , the test of causation not only requires that the defendant was the cause in fact, but also requires that the loss or damage sustained by the claimant was not too remote. Causation in english law concerns the legal tests of remoteness, causation and foreseeability in the tort of negligence it is also relevant for english criminal law and english contract law in the english law of negligence , causation proves a direct link between the defendant ’s negligence and the claimant ’s loss and damage. Concurrent claims in tort and contract: test for remoteness of damage and purpose of the statute and, in the case of an implied contractual duty, the scope is that which the law regards as best. Beheshti, reza, a comparative and normative analysis of the remoteness test in the availability of significant remedies in international sales transactions (april 24, 2016) journal of business law, issue 5, pp 289-310, 2016.
Remoteness rule: limits d's liability to what can be reasonably justified, ensures c does not profit & aids future liabilities assessment remoteness test courts developed tests to determine if the damage is too remote. The orthodox approach remains the general test of remoteness applicable in the great majority of cases however, there may be “unusual” cases, such as the “achilleas” itself, in which the context, surrounding circumstances or general understanding in the relevant market make it necessary specifically to consider whether there has been. Remoteness is another key element of tort law that examines the link between the duty of care owed by the defendant to the loss suffered by the claimant.
Hadley v baxendale is the seminal case dealing with the circumstances in which damanges will be available for breach of contract the case determines that the test of remoteness in contract law is contemplation. The issue of factual causation is usually determined by applying the “but for” test and legal causation involves an analysis of the question of remoteness the court also indicated that the difficulty of proving causation in psychiatric cases does not always amount to impossibility. Contract: in contract, the traditional test of remoteness is set out in hadley v baxendale ( 9 ex 341)the test is in essence a test of foreseeability that is, the loss will only be recoverable if it was in the contemplation of the parties. Remoteness limits the ability of a plaintiff to recover damages to only those which are reasonably foreseeable to the parties a plaintiff can only recover damages if the loss suffered was not 'remote' damages will not be considered remote if the loss was: a loss arising naturally, reasonably foreseeable to anyone.
Following the wagon mound no 1 the test for remoteness of damage is that damage must be of a kind which was foreseeable once damage is of a kind that is foreseeable the defendant is liable for the full extent of the damage no matter whether the extent of the damage is foreseeable. Remoteness of damage is an interesting principle especially when analyzing two specific cases they are apparently allocated in different areas of law, functioning in england and wales in first case claimant is overseas tankship (uk) ltd and brings a suit against morts dock and engineering co ltd1 the case lays down principles relating to. The question of the remoteness test applicable to the hedley byrne5 assumption of responsibility negligence liability is easier it is largely agreed that such liability, like contractual liability, is based upon an assumption of responsibility, and so the contract test should apply to.
Remoteness of means of egress is fundamental to life safety, but it can be difficult to assess the basis of the one-half diagonal approach prevalent in the united states is questionable the angle of exit remoteness is a rational assessment method that affords greater design flexibility. ‘remoteness’ refers to the test of causation that is used to determine the loss caused by a breach of contract it limits the ability of the plaintiff to recover damages to not too remote losses. Negligence causation and remoteness revision the following is a plain text extract of the pdf sample above, taken from our tort i (intentional & negligence) notesthis text version has had its formatting removed so pay attention to its contents alone rather than its presentation.
The test for remoteness in tort is damage that is reasonably foreseeable however the test for remoteness in contract is damage that ought to be in the reasonable contemplation of the parties. In this part, the remoteness test in each of the legal regimes will be scrutinised finally, this article will present a critical comparative analysis, based on the normative framework introduced above, regarding the absence of the foreseeability requirement under the sga versus its presence. Causation and remoteness in tort revision the following is a plain text extract of the pdf sample above, taken from our tort law notesthis text version has had its formatting removed so pay attention to its contents alone rather than its presentation.
-the pc defined the degree of foreseeability that would satisfy the new test for remoteness of damage - a foreseeable risk is a real risk which would occur to the mind of a reasonable man in the position of the defendant and which he would not brush aside as far fetched. Remoteness of damage the consequences of a wrongful act may be endless no defendant can be made liable ‘ad infinitum’ for all the consequences which follows his wrongful act.
87 remoteness of damage in contract and its functional equivalents: a critical economic approach cristian paziuc abstract: hadley v baxendale remoteness is generally regarded favourably in the law and economics literature. In the leading judgment, lord hoffmann reviewed the test for “remoteness of damage”, which is the legal test used to decide which types of loss caused by a breach of contract may be compensated by an award of damages. The test was easy to state and relatively unproblematic to apply: was the loss caused by the breach of contract a kind of loss which, at the time the contract was concluded, the parties would reasonably have contemplated as not unlikely to result from the breach.