Nominal Damages

legal updates

The aim of the court in civil litigation is to put the parties back in the position they were in had the contract not been breached.

Read our disclaimer keyboard_arrow_down

This website content is intended as a general guide to law as it applies to the motor trade. Lawgistics has taken every effort to ensure that the contents are as accurate and up to date as at the date of first publication.

The laws and opinions expressed within this website may be varied as the law develops. As such we cannot accept liability for or the consequence of, any change of law, or official guidelines since publication or any misuse of the information provided.

The opinions in this website are based upon the experience of the authors and it must be recognised that only the courts and recognised tribunals can interpret the law with authority.

Examples given within the website are based on the experience of the authors and centre upon issues that commonly give rise to disputes. Each situation in practice will be different and may comprise several points commented upon.

If you have any doubt about the correct legal position you should seek further legal advice from Lawgistics or a suitably qualified solicitor. We cannot accept liability for your failure to take professional advice where it should reasonably be sought by a prudent person.

All characters are fictitious and should not be taken as referring to any person living or dead.

Use of this website shall be considered acceptance of the terms of the disclaimer presented above.

“You’ve got a severe abrasion on your gluteus maximus.”

If you’ve ever heard a doctor proclaim this, you might be concerned about it until you realise that it means nothing more than you’ve got a bruise on your backside. Similarly in claims for breach of contract, the party seeking damages has to show that they’ve actually suffered damage.

If they can’t prove the damage suffered, then even if the terms of the contract are breached, they might only receive nominal damages as part of a court’s judgment. These are where a party has breached a contract, but the other party has not suffered actual damage as a result. As the aim of the court in civil litigation is to put the parties back in the position they were in had the contract not been breached, breaching a contract itself is not something a party can expect to be punished harshly for, however unfair that might seem. Typically, you might get between £5-£10 in damages. Enough for a coffee and a snack, but not worth incurring legal costs for.

There is the option of applying for a declaration of the court as to your legal rights, the existence of certain facts, or just to uphold a particular principle. Such declarations though are usually sought alongside other remedies, such as injunctions or orders for specific performance, which will compel or constrain a party to take or refrain from certain actions and are often worth the time, effort, and cost involved. Seeking a declaration by itself may well prompt the court to consider that you are wasting its time and resources, as illustrated by the recent case of Uzbekov v Revolut Ltd [2024] EWHC 98 (Admin). Here, the claimant sought an authoritative declaration that the defendant had no grounds for suspecting him of money laundering, even though he’d suffered no financial loss when it closed his account. The defendant responded by seeking and obtaining an order for summary judgment leading to the claim being dismissed.

Besides the question of whether a party has incurred loss, the court will also take conduct into account. In Shah v Shah [2021] EWHC 1668 (QB), the claimant had made a Part 36 offer to the defendant, to settle the matter if the defendant accepted £1.00 in nominal damages. The defendant rejected the offer only to see the claimant win £10.00 in nominal damages at a hearing. The court then upheld the terms of the Part 36 offer, that required the defendant to pay the claimant’s substantial legal costs. Meanwhile, in Wright v McCormack [2023] EWCA Civ 892, the claimant, though successful in a libel claim against the defendant, was found to have originally advanced a deliberately false claim. The court responded to this by ruling that, while the defendant’s tweets about the claimant had been defamatory, the defendant only needed to pay £1.00 to the claimant.

So, in any potential claim, it’s always worth reflecting on what the breach of contract has actually cost you. If you’re left scratching your head to find a figure, or if you are in the reverse situation about what possible damage you may have caused, then give Lawgistics a call.

DMS NavigatorDealer Management System software for Car Sales, Aftersales and eCommerce

Our dealers use us to help them be more Efficient and Profitable!

You can use our Dealer and Lead Management software to integrate all dealership departments, both online and physical ; providing all in-house functions; Invoicing, Stock Management, Accounting and Marketing as well as interfacing for advertising, ecommerce and more.

Gareth WoodLegal AdvisorRead More by this author

Related Legal Updates

Default judgment but no claim form?

Here’s how to act quickly, get the paperwork you need, and give yourself the best chance of setting the judgment aside under rule 13.3.

Importance of taking your customers’ details!

Garages aren’t legally required to take a customer’s address before repair or sale, but skipping it can stall Torts notices and court action when vehicles are abandoned or not collected.

Mediation appointments: the court’s take on ‘delays’

You can tell the court you’re unavailable, but will that stop a telephone mediation being listed? In our client’s case it didn’t, and the refusal to move it now means a full hearing next year.

Witness Statements: Own the Weakness and Turn Up to Court

Courts are scrutinising credibility more than ever. A Witness Statement that ducks its weak points or a witness who fails to attend risks serious damage to their case

Broker Falls Flat: Court Dismisses Flimsy Claim Against Dealer

A County Court ruling has reinforced the importance of solid evidence and clear contracts, rejecting a broker’s claim against a car dealer over an alleged pre-existing fault.

Small Claims and Expert Fees: Understanding the £750 Cap

Parties should carefully consider the necessity and proportionality of obtaining expert evidence to avoid incurring irrecoverable costs.

Buyer Beware: £4K Discovery claim falls flat in court

An opportunistic claim for nearly £9,000 on a £4,000 used vehicle was thrown out by the court, reinforcing the principle of caveat emptor in business-to-business sales.

Get in touch

Complete the form to get in touch or via our details below:

Phone
01480 455500
Address

Vinpenta House
High Causeway
Whittlesey
Peterborough
PE7 1AE

By submitting this quote you agree to our Terms & Conditions and Privacy & Cookies Policy.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.