Remoteness and the limitation of contractual damages
| dc.contributor.advisor | Myburgh, Franziska | en_ZA |
| dc.contributor.advisor | Du Plessis, Jacques | en_ZA |
| dc.contributor.author | Diamond, Alma | en_ZA |
| dc.contributor.other | Stellenbosch University. Faculty of Law. Dept. of Private Law. | en_ZA |
| dc.date.accessioned | 2016-12-22T13:31:31Z | |
| dc.date.available | 2016-12-22T13:31:31Z | |
| dc.date.issued | 2016-12-07 | |
| dc.description | Thesis (LLM)--Stellenbosch University, 2016 | en_ZA |
| dc.description.abstract | ENGLISH ABSTRACT : This study explores remoteness of contractual damages in South African law. The manner in which South African contract law limits the extent of a plaintiff's recovery of damages caused by breach is controversial. Criticism has been expressed about, inter alia, the distinction between general and special damages, the convention requirement imposed for the recovery of special damages, and the approach of determining remoteness at the time of contracting and not of breach. It is expected that the current approach will be revised when the opportunity arises. In light of the debate around the current South African approach, and the need for its development, this study provides a detailed overview of the premise, purpose and operation of rules of remoteness. The study commences with a historical overview of the early civil and common law approaches to remoteness and their subsequent development in France, Germany and England. Against that background, the development of the South African approach is discussed and the various sources relied upon by South African courts placed in context. The study then considers three different theories of remoteness: the direct consequences theory, the adequate cause theory, and the foreseeability theory. The direct consequences theory is discussed in the context of English law. The discussion highlights the necessity for the remoteness inquiry to take account of the facts of a particular case. The adequate cause theory, in turn, is explored in the context of German law. The theory's development into a discretionary, policy-based approach to remoteness is discussed with reference to the adoption of the Schutzzwecklehre. The foreseeability theory is explored in two contexts: its application in English law and under the model instruments. The overview of English law shows that a distinction between general and special damages is often unhelpful and even detrimental to the remoteness inquiry. The recent move in English law toward an agreement-centred approach to remoteness is also evaluated with reference to the South African convention principle. Finally, foreseeability as applied in the model instruments is evaluated. It is concluded that the flexible approach to the foreseeability theory seen in the model instruments addresses many of the identified limitations of traditional foreseeability tests. The study suggests that the remoteness inquiry should focus on a discovery of what parties could reasonably have taken into account when contracting. For this reason, it is recommended that remoteness be determined with reference to the time of contract conclusion; and that it should not depend upon the parties' intentions or agreement about liability for damages. Additionally, the study finds that the foreseeability inquiry cannot draw a rigid distinction between the nature and extent of a loss. Ultimately, it is suggested that a flexible approach to foreseeability would resolve many of the limitations of the current South African approach. Such an approach would align the remoteness inquiry to notions of fairness and economic efficiency, as well as the constitutional value of human dignity. | |
| dc.description.abstract | AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING : Hierdie studie ondersoek die begrensing van kontraktuele skadevergoeding in die Suid-Afrikaanse reg. Die wyse waarop die Suid-Afrikaanse kontraktereg 'n eiser se reg tot vergoeding vir skade veroorsaak deur kontrakbreuk beperk, is kontroversieël. Kritiek word uitgespreek teen, onder andere, die onderskeid tussen algemene en besonderse skadevergoeding, die sogenaamde konvensie-vereiste vir die verhaalbaarheid van besondere skade, asook die feit dat aanspreeklikheidsbegrensing bepaal word met verwysing na die oomblik van kontraksluiting eerder as kontrakbreuk. Daar word verwag dat die huidige posisie hersien sal word wanneer die geleentheid hom voordoen. In die lig van die debat rondom die huidige Suid-Afrikaanse benadering, en die behoefte aan die ontwikkeling van daardie benadering, bied hierdie werkstuk 'n gedetailleerde oorsig van die vertrekpunt, doel en werking van reëls van aanspreeklikheidsbegrensing in die kontraktereg. Die studie begin met 'n geskiedkundige oorsig oor die vroeë siviel- en gemeenregtelike reëls van aanspreeklikheidsbegrensing en die daaropvolgende ontwikkeling van hierdie reëls in Frankryk, Engeland en Duitsland. Teen dié agtergrond word die ontwikkeling van die Suid-Afrikaanse benadering uiteengesit, en die verskillende bronne waarop Suid-Afrikaanse howe gesteun het in daardie ontwikkeling in konteks geplaas. Die studie oorweeg daarna drie verskillende teorieë oor die begrensing van kontraktuele skadevergoeding: die direkte gevolge-teorie, die adekwate veroorsakingsteorie, en die voorsienbaarheidsteorie. Die direkte gevolge-teorie word in die konteks van Engelse reg bespreek. Die bespreking van die teorie beklemtoon die noodsaaklikheid vir enige toets van aanspreeklikheidsbegrensing om die feite van elke spesifieke saak in ag te kan neem. Die adekwate veroorsakingsteorie word bespreek in die konteks van Duitse reg. Die teorie se ontwikkeling na 'n meer beleidgeoriënteerde, diskresionêre benadering word bespreek veral met verwysing na die aanvaarding van die Schutzzwecklehre. Die voorsienbaarheidsteorie word in twee verskillende kontekste ondersoek, naamlik Engelse reg en die model-instrumente. Die oorsig oor Engelse reg dui daarop dat 'n onderskeid tussen algemene en besondere skadevergoeding onnodig en selfs nadelig vir die bepaling van aanspreeklikheidsbegrensing is. Die onlangse beweging in Engelse reg na 'n ooreenkoms-gefokusde toets word geëvalueer met die oog op die Suid-Afrikaanse konvensie-vereiste. Die voorsienbaarheidstoets soos toegepas deur model-instrumente word laastens ondersoek. Daar word gevind dat 'n buigsame benadering tot die voorsienbaarheidsteorie in staat is om heelwat van die beperkings van die tradisionele toets, soos geïdentifiseer in die navorsing, te vermy. Die studie kom tot die gevolgtrekking dat die aanspreeklikheidsbegrensing-ondersoek behoort te fokus op watter gevolge van kontrakbreuk partye redelikerwys tydens kontraksluiting in ag kon neem. Gevolglik word aanbeveel dat die beperking van kontraktuele skadevergoeding moet plaasvind met verwysing na die oomblik van kontraksluiting eerder as kontrakbreuk, en dat partye se ooreenkoms oor aanspreeklikheid nie die fokus van die toets behoort te wees nie. Daar word ook bevind dat daar geen streng onderskeid tussen die tipe en omvang van skade getref kan word nie. Uiteindelik word daar voorgestel dat die voorsienbaarheidstoets op 'n buigsame manier in Suid Afrika toegepas moet word. So 'n benadering is in lyn met oorwegings van ekonomiese doeltreffendheid en regverdigheid, asook die grondwetlike waarde van menswaardigheid. | |
| dc.format.extent | xiii, 194 pages | en_ZA |
| dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/10019.1/100247 | |
| dc.language.iso | en_ZA | en_ZA |
| dc.publisher | Stellenbosch : Stellenbosch University | en_ZA |
| dc.rights.holder | Stellenbosch University | en_ZA |
| dc.subject | Penalties, Contractual | en_ZA |
| dc.subject | Contracts -- Remoteness | en_ZA |
| dc.subject | Contractual damages -- South Africa | en_ZA |
| dc.subject | Causation -- Law | en_ZA |
| dc.subject | UCTD | en_ZA |
| dc.subject | Contracts -- South Africa | en_ZA |
| dc.subject | Foreseeability theory -- Law | en_ZA |
| dc.title | Remoteness and the limitation of contractual damages | en_ZA |
| dc.type | Thesis | en_ZA |