- This topic has 3 replies, 2 voices, and was last updated 9 years ago by
.
- Posts
Sir in the case of Payzu v Saunders , what do we mean by
‘Damages were limited to the amount of their assumed loss if they had paid in advance, which was interest over the period of pre payment?
‘Damages were limited to the amount of their assumed loss if they had paid in advance, which was interest over the period of pre payment?’
This means that damages were restricted
How to measure these restricted damages?
Consider that payment had been made in advance. If that were so, the payer would not have been able to use the cash paid in any other way and, particularly, would not have been able to invest it and earn interest
So damages were limited to the amount of the assumed loss that would have been suffered if payment had been made in advance. If that HAD been the situation, then the loss would have been the interest lost because the money was no longer available for investment – it had been paid in advance
OK?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.