| 单词 | Hadley v Baxendale, rule in |
| 释义 | Hadley訴Baxendale之原則 The basic rule governing the law of remoteness of damage in contract. The plaintiff may recover such damages as may fairly and reasonably be considered as arising naturally (that is, according to the usual course of things) from such breach of contract itself, or such as may reasonably be supposed to have been in the contemplation of both parties at the time they made the contract, as the probable result of its breach: Hadley v Baxendale (1854) 9 Ex 341, 156 ER 145, [1843-60] All ER 461; Shum Yip – UTC (HK) Co Ltd v Master Co [2000] 2 HKLRD 809 (CFI); Li Sze Fat v Cheng Ka Leung & Anor [2001] 3 HKLRD J14 (CFI). The rule contrasts general damages on the one hand with special damages on the other: for example Oriental Air Transport Service Ltd v Cargocare Hong Kong Ltd [2001] 2 HKLRD 79 (CFI). See also Breach of contract; Damages; General damages; Remoteness; Special damages. 規管合約法損害賠償是否間接的基本規則。原告人僅可就可被公正而合理地認為是因該違約本身而自然（即根據事物發展的正常過程）產生的損害追討賠償，或原告人僅可就可合理地假定，是在雙方訂定合約之際，已預期是違反該合約頗有可能會引起的後果的損害追討賠償，Hadley v Baxendale (1854) 9 Ex 341, 156 ER 145, [1843-60] All ER 461；Shum Yip – UTC (HK) Co Ltd v Master Co [2000] 2 HKLRD 809（原訟法庭）；Li Sze Fat v Cheng Ka Leung & Anor [2001] 3 HKLRD J14（原訟法庭）。這原則把一般損害賠償與專項損害賠償形成對照。此等原則就一般損害賠償與專項損害賠償作出區別：例如Oriental Air Transport Service Ltd v Cargocare Hong Kong Ltd [2001] 2 HKLRD 79（原訟法庭）。另見 Breach of contract; Damages; General damages; Remoteness; Special damages。 |
| 随便看 |
|
法律词典收录了8080条英汉双解法律词条，基本涵盖了常用法律英语单词及短语词组的翻译及用法，是法律学习的有利工具。