Reducing Damages Awards: Mitigation of Loss in Contractual and Intellectual Property Claims

Mitigation of damage arises in a number ofincur expense in doing so) rather than allowing
contexts. Claimants to legal proceedings have atheir damage to exacerbate by not acting;
positive duty to avoid suffering loss when a legal3. Allowing time to pass to acquire alternate
wrong has been suffered be them. Mitigation is agoods or services in order to deliver on a
powerful set of legal principles that entitle acontract, a claim that the claimant has failed to
defendant to argue that they are obliged to paymitigate is more likely to be successful;
lesser sums in a claim for damages.4. Where there are avenues available to
What should or should not have been mitigatedsafeguard an interest, such as registering a
by reasonable action in a particular case is aregistered interest in property on a relevant public
question relying on the facts of the case.register and the claimant has not done so, is it
Whether the law imposes upon the claimant thelikely that a claimant has failed to mitigate;
obligation to mitigate on those facts in the first5. Where sale of property may be made to
place, that is, has the duty arisen, is a question ofminimize loss in a buoyant market and is not
law.made, there may have been a failure to mitigate;
Background6. Where a claimant exercises a right to terminate
The measure of compensation that a claimant isa contract on the basis of late delivery may be
entitled to recover is the loss naturally flowingrelevant to mitigation in a rising market and they
from the legal wrong. This measure of damage isrefuse to accept an offer less than what a
offset by a duty to mitigate – or minimizepurchaser in the rising market may be prepared
– losses suffered by them by taking allto pay;
reasonable steps to mitigate the loss consequent7. In some cases, it may be unreasonable for an
on the breach.injured party to consider an offer from the party
Thus, simply because a defendant breaches ain breach in mitigation; in commercial contracts
contract or infringed copyright does not mean(rather than those of personal service) this will
that a claimant is entitled to recover endlessordinary not be the case.
damages or compensation for their conduct.On the other hand, the claimant may not be
Unsuccessful litigants are not required torequired to mitigate:
compensate a successful claimant where the1. When the claimant does not need to undertake
claimant has sat back and allowed damages toundue risk in expending resources to mitigate loss;
accumulate or to pay sums that are too remote2. Commencing action against another defendant,
in law to recover.where a cause of action lies against other parties
For instances, a supplier of goods or services failswho are liable to them, where a case with
to deliver, the buyer is not entitled to sit back onreasonable prospects of success cannot be
a rising market or wait until a contract for onwardshown;
supply has fallen though, and then claim the loss3. in circumstances that would require the inured
from the defendant. They must approach theparty to surrender, dispose of or destroy their
market with reasonable speed and buy equivalentown property rights to mitigate the loss of
goods or services.defendant;
Reasonable Steps to Avoid Loss4. a claimant will not be required to act against the
A claimant must take reasonable steps tointerests of innocent parties to reduce
mitigate loss. Claimants are not entitled to recoverrecoverable loss;
those damages represented by sums that are5. the claimant is not required to sacrifice their
avoidable by taking reasonable steps. If thecommercial reputation in order to avoid losses
claimant has failed to take reasonable steps tosuffered by a breach of contract;
avoid particular losses, the claimant is not entitled6. to allocate resources, including personnel and
in law to recover them, as they are not entitledfinances that they do not have to take steps to
to profit from their own neglect. This neglect maymitigate their loss. Note that this would need to
take of the form of either failing to take actionbe proved with sworn evidence.
reasonable steps or allowing an act to continueRecovering Sums spent in Mitigation
that would have increases loss.When a claimant does take steps to mitigate their
A claimant is not entitled to recover sums or forloss, the loss that they suffer as a result of
actions taken that were unreasonably spent ortaking those steps is in broad principle recoverable
steps that were unreasonably taken. The claimantfrom the defendant. This remains the case if the
will only be entitled to recover those expensessteps taken incur greater expense or loss than
that were reasonably incurred.would have been incurred if these actions had not
Where a claimant takes measures to mitigatebeen taken.
loss, the defendant is entitled to the benefit ofInstances of where this has been the case are:
those steps, such that the defendant is required1. Where substitute goods or services are
to pay the reduced measures of damagesrequired to replace damaged, destroyed or
resulting from the steps made in mitigation. In thisundelivered goods;
way, the claimant must hand over the benefit of2. Expenditure on advertisements where trade
the steps made in mitigation to the defendant.mark infringement has taken place;
This applies even if the claimant would have been3. Incurring expenses to conduct enquiries where
entitled to recover the losses if the particularunlawful conduct has taken place, in the
steps made in mitigation had not been made.appropriate circumstances, even though the
What is Reasonable?enquiries may have exacerbated damage,
Although the claimant is not required to nurse theprovided that there was no ulterior motive.
interests of the defendant as if they were hisAlthough such actions may increase or aggravate
own. A claimant does not need to act withdamage suffered, the increased damage is
perfect knowledge or an ideal wisdom, howeverrecoverable as well as the incurred expense,
the law will protect against wanton, needless orprovided that the steps are taken to safeguard
careless conduct.the claimants interests.
The same test applies to the duty to mitigateThere is a caveat to recover of sums spent in
regardless of whether it is an infringement ofmitigation over and above what the law considers
intellectual property rights, a contract claim, or thereasonable. If the claimant goes further than what
more serious claims such as fraudulentthe law requires, the defendant will be entitled to
misrepresentation. The parties must actthe reduction of damage. The claimant must be
reasonably between themselves having regard foraware of the limits of what may be reasonably
the turn of events between them. The claimant isdone in the circumstances to reduce their loss,
not required to take unusual steps outside theand then realise they are not required to go
outside the ordinary course of business; indeed iffurther. That limit is where the expense in
they do so, they will not be entitled to recovermitigation is not one arising out of the
the sums expended.consequences of the breach, and not in the
The following guidance may be useful toordinary course of business.
determining when the claimant has a duty toConclusion
mitigate their loss:Although many claimants may have strong claims
1. The time that the claimant came into theon liability for infringement of copyright, patents
knowledge that a breach had taken place may beand other intellectual property rights, mitigation is
relevant to determining when it would bea sword in the hands of the defendant to reduce
reasonable for them to take action to mitigateloss suffered: if the claimant does not discharge it
loss;duty to mitigate, they are not entitled to recover
2. where damage may be caused in the naturalthat loss, thus reducing the sum to be paid by the
course of events to the claimant’s property,defendant.
they may be required make their own repairs (or