Chaplin v Hicks
| Chaplin v Hicks | |
|---|---|
 | |
| Court | Court of Appeal of England and Wales |
| Citation(s) | [1911] 2 KB 786 |
| Keywords | |
| Contract, remedies | |
Chaplin v Hicks [1911] 2 KB 786 is an English contract law case, concerning the right to damages for loss of a chance after a breach of contract.
Facts
Mr Hicks, a well-known actor and theatrical manager, invited ladies to submit their photographs to compete in a beauty contest where the winners would be chosen by the readers of one newspaper. He promised to give engagements as actresses to the winners. Ms Chaplin submitted her photograph and came first in her section, which entitled her to be considered for one of the twelve finalists. The notice reached her too late, and she was not able to make the appointment with Mr Hicks. She sued Mr Hicks for damages for breach of contract to compensate her for the loss of a chance to be selected for an engagement.
Judgment
The Court of Appeal upheld a £100 award for the loss of the chance at winning the contest, awarded by the jury.
Vaughan Williams LJ dismissed the arguments that the damages were either (1) too remote or (2) unassessable.
The damages were not too remote. As regards remoteness, the test that is generally applied is to see whether the damages sought to be recovered follow so naturally or by express declaration from the terms of the contract that they can be said to be the result of the breach. This generally resolves itself into the question whether the damages flowing from a breach of contract were such as must have been contemplated by the parties as a possible result of the breach. Clearly in this case the damages must have been contemplated.
The damages were not unassessable. It is impossible to attain certainty, but that does not mean the damages were unassessable. The fact that the damages cannot be assessed with certainty does not relieve the wrongdoer of the necessity of paying damages for his breach of contract. The jury must do the best they can.