Harding v Teperoi Timbers Pty Ltd [1988] SPLawRp 10; [1988] SPLR 283 (22 July 1988)

[1988] SPLR 283

IN THE NATIONAL COURT

HARDING

v

TEPEROI TIMBERS PTY. LTD

Kidu C.J.
22 July 1988

Employment law — wrongful dismissal — whether damages for breach of employment contract can include an award for distress, loss of reputation, and embarrassment. Damages — breach of employment contract — whether damages can be awarded for distress, loss of reputation, and embarrassment

Damages — breach of employment contract — whether it is within the contemplation of the contracting parties that a foreseeable result of a breach of contract will be to cause vexation, frustration, and distress.

Facts:

The plaintiff was wrongfully dismissed, in breach of contract, from his position as the defendant's general manager. Judgment had been entered against the defendant and the only matter before the Court was the assessment of damages. The elements of lost wages, accrued holiday pay, and air fares were not in dispute, and the Court discussed only the plaintiff's claim under the head, general damages, for distress, loss of reputation, and embarrassment.

HELD:

(1) Where at the time of making a contract it is within the contemplation of the contracting parties that a foreseeable result of a breach of contract will be to cause vexation, frustration, or distress then if a breach occurs which does bring about that result, damages are recoverable under that heading. Addis v Gramophone Co. Ltd. [1909] AC 488 not followed; Cox v. Philips Industries Ltd. [1976] 1 WLR 638; [1976] 3 All ER 161 applied.
(2) As a "good commonsense conclusion", "in employment contracts there cannot be any doubt that it is the contemplation of the parties that if the employee is dismissed in breach of the contract it is foreseeable that the effect would be to cause him/her to suffer some degree of mental distress, frustration or upset": page 292, line 364.
(3) In light of the meagre evidence of distress, K1, 000 (a nominal amount) only would be awarded.

Other cases referred to in judgment:
Addis v. Gramophone Co. Ltd. [1909] AC 488
Archer v. Brown [1984] 3 WLR 350
Athens-Macdonald Travel Service Pty. Ltd. v. Kazis [1970] SASR 264
Bailey v. Bullock [1950] 2 All ER 1167
Beswick v. Beswick [1967] 2 All ER 1197
Cheong Supermarket Pty. Ltd. v. Percy Muro t/a Gigidu Trade Store [1987] PNGLR 24
Cox v. Philips Industries Ltd. [1976] 1 WLR 638; [1976] 3 All ER 161
Davis & Co. (Wines) Ltd. v. Afa-Minerva (EMI) Ltd. [1974] 2 Lloyds Rep. 27
Ex parte Fewings: In re Sneyd (1883) 25 Ch.D. 338
Falko v. James McEwan & Co. Pty. Ltd. [1977] VR 447
Hamlin v. Great Northern Railway Co