4.5.2 Damages for NonperformanceIf

4.5.2 Damages for Nonperformance

If performance of the contract does not take place at all, or is too late or defective, the creditor may have the possibility to claim damages for nonperformance of the contract. This is in line with the principle that an aggrieved party should be brought as much as possible in the position in which it would have been if the contract had been properly performed.

Common Law Approach There are two ways to reason about the availability of this claim. The first is to hold the nonperforming party liable simply because it did not perform. In this view, it does not matter whether the party was at fault or not: the mere fact of nonperformance gives rise to liability in damages. This is the position of common law, well captured in the English case of Nicolene Ltd v. Simmonds (1952): “It does not matter whether the failure to fulfil the contract by the seller is because he is indifferent or wilfully negligent or just unfortunate. It does not matter what the reason is. What matters is the fact of performance. Has he performed or not?” Even if the IT company could not help it that the network was down for more than a day, it still needs to compensate its customers.

Civil Law Approach The other way of reasoning is to allow a claim for damages only if the party in breach was at fault or can at least be held responsible for the nonperformance. This is the position of civil law jurisdictions. Thus, Art. 1148 of the French Civil Code states that no damages are due when the person who is to perform was prevented from doing so by an irresistible force ( force majeure). This means, in most cases, that a party is freed from any liability if it can prove that it used its best efforts in performing the contract.
Despite these different mentalities of common law and civil law, both legal traditions come close in the practical results that they reach. If the Rolling Stones hired Wembley stadium for a series of three concerts and the stadium were set on fire by Manchester United supporters before the first concert took place, the rock group could not claim any damages because an English court would construe a so-called implied condition, according to which the parties are excused in case performance becomes impossible through no fault of their own (cf. Taylor
v. Caldwell, 1863). Many civil law jurisdictions make use of a similar fiction, but


then to hold the debtor liable even though there was no fault on its part. They can do this by implying that the seller has given a guarantee that the goods it sold are fit for its purpose.

Kết quả (Việt) 1:

4.5.2 thiệt hại cho NonperformanceNếu thực hiện hợp đồng không diễn ra ở tất cả, hoặc là quá muộn hoặc khiếm khuyết, chủ nợ có khả năng để yêu cầu bồi thường thiệt hại cho nonperformance của hợp đồng. Điều này là phù hợp với nguyên tắc một bên aggrieved nên được đưa ra càng nhiều càng tốt ở vị trí mà nó đã có nếu hợp đồng đã được thực hiện đúng cách.Luật pháp phổ biến phương pháp tiếp cận có hai cách để các lý do về sự sẵn có của tuyên bố này. Đầu tiên là để tổ chức bữa tiệc nonperforming chịu trách nhiệm chỉ đơn giản là bởi vì nó đã không thực hiện. Nhìn này, nó không có vấn đề cho dù các bên đã có lỗi hay không: thực tế chỉ nonperformance cho phép tăng đến trách nhiệm bồi thường thiệt hại. Đây là vị trí phổ biến pháp luật, cũng bị bắt giữ trong case Nicolene ty TNHH v. Simmonds (1952), tiếng Anh: "nó không quan trọng cho dù thất bại để thực hiện hợp đồng của bên bán là vì ông là vô tư hay là cẩu thả hay không may chỉ. Nó không quan trọng lý do là gì. Điều quan trọng là một thực tế của hiệu suất. Có ông thực hiện hay không?" Thậm chí nếu công ty của NÓ không thể giúp nó rằng mạng xuống cho hơn một ngày, nó vẫn cần phải bồi thường cho khách hàng của mình.Civil Law Approach The other way of reasoning is to allow a claim for damages only if the party in breach was at fault or can at least be held responsible for the nonperformance. This is the position of civil law jurisdictions. Thus, Art. 1148 of the French Civil Code states that no damages are due when the person who is to perform was prevented from doing so by an irresistible force ( force majeure). This means, in most cases, that a party is freed from any liability if it can prove that it used its best efforts in performing the contract.Despite these different mentalities of common law and civil law, both legal traditions come close in the practical results that they reach. If the Rolling Stones hired Wembley stadium for a series of three concerts and the stadium were set on fire by Manchester United supporters before the first concert took place, the rock group could not claim any damages because an English court would construe a so-called implied condition, according to which the parties are excused in case performance becomes impossible through no fault of their own (cf. Taylorv. Caldwell, 1863). Many civil law jurisdictions make use of a similar fiction, but then to hold the debtor liable even though there was no fault on its part. They can do this by implying that the seller has given a guarantee that the goods it sold are fit for its purpose.