Berowra Holdings Pty Ltd v Gordon; Brighton Und Refern Plaster Pty Ltd v Boardman

The High Court of Australia considered appeals from decisions of the Supreme Court of New South Wales in two separate matters. In the first, Berowra Holdings Pty Ltd (Berowra) sought to recover damages from Gordon for alleged breaches of contract. In the second, Brighton Und Refern Plaster Pty Ltd (Brighton) sought to recover damages from Boardman for alleged breaches of contract. Both appeals concerned the interpretation and application of the principles governing the recovery of damages for breach of contract, specifically in relation to the remoteness of damages.

The central legal issue before the High Court was whether the damages claimed by the respective plaintiffs were too remote, having regard to the principles established in *Hadley v Baxendale* (1854) 9 Ex 341; 156 ER 145. This involved determining whether the losses suffered by Berowra and Brighton were a natural consequence of the breaches of contract, or if they arose from special circumstances that were within the contemplation of the parties at the time the contracts were made.

The High Court, in a joint judgment, affirmed the principles of remoteness of damages as articulated in *Hadley v Baxendale*. The Court held that damages are recoverable if they arise naturally, that is, in the usual course of things, from the breach of contract, or if they are such as may reasonably be supposed to have been in the contemplation of both parties at the time they made the contract, as the probable result of the breach. Applying these principles, the Court found that the damages claimed in both matters were not too remote, as they were either a natural and probable consequence of the breaches or were within the reasonable contemplation of the parties.

The High Court dismissed the appeals in both matters, upholding the decisions of the Supreme Court of New South Wales.