Punitive damages: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
m Reverted edits by Vannurden (talk) to last version by Dcbiglaw
DMTayag (talk | contribs)
Line 11: Line 11:
==External links==
==External links==
* [http://www.aon.com/us/busi/risk_management/risk_transfer/punitive_damages.jsp Introduction to Punitive Damages]
* [http://www.aon.com/us/busi/risk_management/risk_transfer/punitive_damages.jsp Introduction to Punitive Damages]

*[http://legalnews.tv/commentary/figures_dont_lie_but_lawyers_can_figure_20060906.html Figures Don't Lie But Lawyers Can Figure] at [http://www.legalnews.tv LNTV]


{{law-stub}}
{{law-stub}}

Revision as of 20:58, 6 September 2006

Generally, punitive damages, which are termed exemplary damages in the United Kingdom, are damages not awarded in order to compensate the plaintiff, but in order to reform or deter the defendant and similar persons from pursuing a course of action such as that which damaged the plaintiff. Punitive damages are awarded only in special cases where conduct was egregiously invidious, and are over and above the amount of compensatory damages. Great judicial restraint is expected to be exercised in their application. In the United States punitive damages awards are subject to the limitations imposed by the due process of law clauses of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution.

In England and Wales, exemplary damages are limited to the circumstances set out by Lord Patrick Devlin in the leading case of Rookes v. Barnard. They are:

  1. Oppressive, arbitrary or unconstitutional actions by the servants of government.
  2. Where the defendant's conduct was 'calculated' to make a profit for himself.
  3. Where a statute expressly authorises the same.

Rookes v Barnard has been much criticised and has not been followed in Canada or Australia or by the Privy Council.

External links