This site is operated by a business or businesses owned by Informa PLC and all copyright resides with them. Informa PLC's registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. Registered in England and Wales. Number 8860726.
In the light of recent observations in
Scott, this article assesses the legal basis for permitting recovery of damages for loss of chance in the contractual context, seeking to justify such recovery and to analyse the process and standard of proof applicable when proving loss and establishing causation in the case of a contractual claim based on one or more hypotheticals. It also considers some of the difficulties in evaluating these hypotheticals, particularly in the case of sequential or alternative multiple contingencies, and in arriving at a measure for recovery of loss of chance. Finally, it is argued that when seeking to establish liability the courts should avoid mathematical percentages which are relevant to the determination of quantum
In a contractual claim, in addition to the need correctly to identify the nature of the loss being claimed,1
the claimant has to prove that loss2
and to establish that it was caused by the breach of contract,3
ie, that on the balance of probabilities the defendant’s breach was “an
or “dominant” cause of [the claimant’s] loss.5
In principle, the claimant is then entitled to recover in full for that loss.
However, if the loss involves the loss of a chance of securing the expectation under the contract where that loss turns upon the hypothetical actions of third parties, it is not possible to establish the existence of an “actual” loss. Nevertheless, the Court of Appeal