NCA Remedies: Core Doctrine, Damages, and Equitable Relief
Framing the remedies analysis
Every remedies question begins with three moves: identify the interest protected (expectation, reliance, restitution, or non-compensatory policies), classify the wrong (breach of contract, tort, equitable wrong), and then test whether the requested remedy is available and appropriate. Candidates lose marks by jumping straight to a dollar figure without checking whether the claim is contractual or tortious, because the measure of loss differs sharply between them.
Compensatory damages
For breach of contract the default is the expectation measure - put the claimant in the position performance would have produced. Tort uses the restitutionary/status quo ante measure - restore the position before the wrong. Traps to watch: consequential losses require remoteness (foreseeability at formation in contract; reasonable foreseeability in tort) and mitigation; non-pecuniary loss is usually unavailable in commercial contract; and contributory negligence reduces tort damages but is no defence to a contract claim.
Equitable remedies
Specific performance is discretionary and presumptively refused for personal services or where damages are adequate. Injunctions may be prohibitory or mandatory; mandatory relief is granted more sparingly. Rescission unwinds the transaction and requires restitutio in integrum. Rectification corrects a document that failed to record the true agreement. Account of profits and equitable compensation target fiduciaries.
Rule of thumb
Ask: what would have happened had the wrong not occurred? Then subtract avoided loss and add consequential losses only if recoverable. Finally ask whether equity should intervene.
Worked example
A supplier fails to deliver machinery worth £100,000; the buyer had contracted to resell for £130,000 and spent £5,000 on wasted site preparation. Expectation damages = £30,000 lost profit + £5,000 reliance loss (if not double counting), subject to mitigation and remoteness.