The Plaintiff was running a School. Just opposite to this school, the Defendant started a new School. The students of the Plaintiff’s School joined the Defendant’s School. The  Plaintiff suffered loss and hence sued for damages.

You are here:
  • KB Home
  • Model Solved Problems
  • The Plaintiff was running a School. Just opposite to this school, the Defendant started a new School. The students of the Plaintiff’s School joined the Defendant’s School. The  Plaintiff suffered loss and hence sued for damages.
< Back

Answer:

In the given case, the plaintiff cannot succeed in his suit for damages. According to the maxim “Damnum Sine Injuria”, if any loss or damage is caused without violating the legal right of a person, it is not an actionable wrong.

 

In the case given above, the defendant has not violated his legal right in starting a new school adjacent to that of the plaintiff’s.

 

His act might be harmful to the plaintiff but it is not wrongful, and therefore, it does not give rise to a right of action in favour of the injured party, namely, the plaintiff. (Fair and bonafide competition is always allowed).

 

The defendant cannot be sued in a Court and the plaintiff cannot claim damages because his loss was caused without violating the legal right of any person.

 

The facts of the given problem resemble that of the leading case ‘Gloucester Grammar School Case’, wherein it was held that the plaintiff is not entitled for damages for the loss suffered by him due to the defendant starting a School opposite to his School.

Last Updated On January 30, 2018
CartItem Removed. Undo
  • No products in the cart.