Here is the synopsis of our sample research paper on Is the Dominant Model of Compensatory Damages Right?. Have the paper e-mailed to you 24/7/365.
Essay / Research Paper Abstract
The dominant model for the warding of damages under English and Australian law is to award compensation for losses. This 5 page paper considers the way this happens and considers if there should be a greater move for damages to be granted as recognition for a wrong suffered or as punishment. The paper argues for both cases and cites relevant cases. The bibliography cites 6 sources.
Page Count:
5 pages (~225 words per page)
File: TS14_TEdamamges.rtf
Buy This Term Paper »
Unformatted sample text from the term paper:
award. The amount is determined is usually compensation, where there is the basic principle that the plaintiff/claimant, after suffering a wrong, should be placed in a position as if the
wrong had never occurred, for example if this was a case under tort law they should be in a position as if the tort had not taken place (Elliott and
Quinn, 2004). However, there are arguments that the way damages are assessed and awarded not only as compensation of damages suffered, but also as recognition for the wrong suffered.
The basic principle to the compensatory approach is that awards are calculated in a logical fashion in order to make up for losses suffered, for example, if an injury caused
by the defendant results in the loss of work, or the inability to carry on in their former line of work, the loss in terms of wages calculated over their
lifetime may be used, costs incurred such as medical bills and care costs can also be included, these are pecuniary damages. This concept of compensating is known as restitutio in
integrum (Ivamy, 2008). This type of loss is easiest to calculate where there is an actual financial loss and cases such as South Australia Asset Management Corporation v York Montague
Ltd [1997] AC1 demonstrates the way this can be stretched to cover all losses, but how it is limited to the direct rather than indirect losses in the case the
direct looses from an negligent over valuation of a property. However, not all cases are as easily resolved, there is not a simple calculation to account for non financial1
losses, such as where there is pain and suffering, the principle of restitutio in integrum becomes more problematic. In these cases there have been tools developed in order to help
...