{"title":"Form of compensatory damages, date for assessment, taxation","authors":"A. Burrows","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780198705932.003.0012","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The general rule can be expressed as follows: a court must assess in a lump sum all past, present, and future loss resulting from the particular tort or breach of contract being sued for, because no damages can be later given for a cause of action on which judgment has already been given. The classic authority is Fitter v Veal, where the claimant had been awarded £11 damages against the defendant in an action for assault and battery. His injuries proved to be more serious than at first thought and he had to undergo an operation on his skull. It was held that he could not recover for this further loss in a new action.","PeriodicalId":273138,"journal":{"name":"Remedies for Torts, Breach of Contract, and Equitable Wrongs","volume":"28 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-06-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Remedies for Torts, Breach of Contract, and Equitable Wrongs","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198705932.003.0012","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The general rule can be expressed as follows: a court must assess in a lump sum all past, present, and future loss resulting from the particular tort or breach of contract being sued for, because no damages can be later given for a cause of action on which judgment has already been given. The classic authority is Fitter v Veal, where the claimant had been awarded £11 damages against the defendant in an action for assault and battery. His injuries proved to be more serious than at first thought and he had to undergo an operation on his skull. It was held that he could not recover for this further loss in a new action.
一般规则可以表述如下:法院必须一次性评估因被起诉的特定侵权行为或违约而造成的所有过去、现在和未来的损失,因为对于已经作出判决的诉因,不能在以后给予损害赔偿。典型的案例是菲特诉威尔案(Fitter v Veal),该案中,原告被判以人身攻击罪向被告支付11英镑的赔偿金。事实证明,他的伤势比最初想象的要严重,他不得不接受头骨手术。人们认为,他不能在新的诉讼中弥补这一进一步的损失。