Robinson v Harman says the purpose of compensatory damages is to put C in the same financial position they would've been in if contract was performed
Hadley v Baxendale gives the two types of losses (normal and special). Remoteness for normal is if it was foreseeable and for special it is if D knew of the circumstances and the loss it would cause
Thompson v Robinson shows expectation loss and when it works as C got the full cost
Charter v Sullivan shows when expectation loss fails
Anglia TV v Reed shows reliance loss when expectation loss cant be calculated
Farley v Skinner shows reliance loss can cover loss of pleasure
Jackson v Horizon Holidays shows C can only claim damages for mental distress if the purpose of the contract was pleasure
ParkingEye v Beavis shows liquidated damages (contract specifying an amount of damages but could be penalty) and the test for whether its a penalty. this test is if it protects a legitimate interest and isn't an exorbitant amount
Thai Airways v KI Holdings shows C should try to mitigate their losses
White and Cater v McGregor shows always allowed to sue for anticipatory breach
Beswick v Beswick shows equitable remedies are used when damages aren't adequate
Page One Records shows injunctions cant be used if it would amount to specific performance, unfair to make them work together and hard to supervise over long period
Walters v Morgan shows specific performance cannot be used if C acted inequitably