Dellagiacomo v Strauss and Dragh [2015] NSWCATCD 144

Dellagiacomo v Strauss and Dragh [2015] NSWCATCD 144

The applicant was entitled to compensation for loss of rental income and fencing costs under Hadley v Baxendale principles, but not for interest paid on loans or other remote losses, as only losses caused by breach and within contemplation of parties are recoverable.

Parties
Applicant: Tess Dellagiacoma; Respondent: John Igon Strauss; Respondent: Pierre Dragh
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
01 December 2015
Procedural Posture
Contract Dispute / Principal Judgment
Outcome
judgment for applicant against second respondent
Legal Topics
Assessment of Damages, Compensation, Remoteness of Damage
Contract Assessment of Damages Compensation Remoteness of Damage

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Tess Dellagiacoma

Applicant

John Igon Strauss

Respondent

Pierre Dragh

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Contract Dispute / Principal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 assessment of damages for breach of contract
  2. 2 compensation for loss of rental income
  3. 3 remoteness of damage

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant was entitled to compensation for loss of rental income and fencing costs under Hadley v Baxendale principles, but not for interest paid on loans or other remote losses, as only losses caused by breach and within contemplation of parties are recoverable.

Court Disposition

judgment for applicant against second respondent

Orders

  • The second respondent Pierre Dragh is to pay the applicant Tess Dellagiacoma the sum of $17,665.00.