Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
In Australia, punitive damages are not available for breach of contract, [5] but are possible for tort cases.. The law is less settled regarding equitable wrongs. In Harris v Digital Pulse Pty Ltd, [6] the defendant employees knowingly breached contractual and fiduciary duties to their employer by diverting business to themselves and misusing its confidential information.
The Criminal Code (WA) is a complete codification of Western Australia's criminal law. The code is substantially similar to Queensland's criminal code and was constructed with close reference to the Griffith code. Section 4 in appendix B of the Criminal Code Act Compilation Act 1913 (WA) provides that: [25]
The trial was the second of three Federal Court judgments on the issue of Indigenous intellectual property, the other two being Yumbulul v Reserve Bank of Australia (1991) and Bulun Bulun v R & T Textiles (1998), or "T-shirts case". [10] [11] In the 1991 case, Galpu clan artist Terry Yumbulul's Morning Star Pole had been reproduced on the ten ...
Similar to the U.S., the courts in the United Kingdom tend to award monetary compensatory damages in tort cases. However, punitive damages are not applicable in the legal systems of the U.K. and Japan or the contractual cases in Australia and occupy a limited but expanding scope in the People's Republic of China.
To the extent Australia's system retains commonalities with English law, UK jurisprudence retains value as providing guidance to Australian courts. One key tension in Australia is a need for defamation law to strike an appropriate balance between the protection of an individual's reputation and values relating to free speech; as well as ...
Penal damages are liquidated damages which exceed reasonable compensatory damages, making them invalid under common law.While liquidated damage clauses set a pre-agreed value on the expected loss to one party if the other party were to breach the contract, penal damages go further and seek to penalise the breaching party beyond the reasonable losses from the breach. [1]
Generally, punitive damages, which are also termed exemplary damages in the United Kingdom, are not awarded in order to compensate the plaintiff, but in order to reform or deter the defendant and similar persons from pursuing a course of action such as that which damaged the plaintiff.
Burnie Port Authority v General Jones Pty Ltd [1] is a tort law case from the High Court of Australia, which decided it would abolish the rule in Rylands v Fletcher, [2] and the ignis suus principle, incorporating them generally into the tort of negligence.