''Chaplin v Hicks''

911 911, 9/11 or Nine Eleven may refer to: Dates * AD 911 * 911 BC * September 11 ** The 2001 September 11 attacks on the United States by al-Qaeda, commonly referred to as 9/11 ** 11 de Septiembre, Chilean coup d'état in 1973 that ousted the ...

2 KB 786 is an

English contract law English contract law is the body of law that regulates legally binding agreements in England and Wales. With its roots in the lex mercatoria and the activism of the judiciary during the Industrial Revolution, it shares a heritage with countries ...

case, concerning the right to

damages At common law, damages are a remedy in the form of a monetary award to be paid to a claimant as compensation for loss or injury. To warrant the award, the claimant must show that a breach of duty has caused foreseeable loss. To be recognized at ...

for loss of chance after a

breach of contract Breach of contract is a legal cause of action and a type of civil wrong, in which a binding agreement or bargained-for exchange is not honored by one or more of the parties to the contract by non-performance or interference with the other part ...

Facts

Seymour Hicks Sir Edward Seymour Hicks (30 January 1871 – 6 April 1949), better known as Seymour Hicks, was a British actor, music hall performer, playwright, actor-manager and producer. He became known, early in his career, for writing, starring in and p ...

, a well-known actor and theatrical manager, invited women to submit their photographs to compete in a beauty contest where the winners would be chosen by the readers of one newspaper. He promised to give engagements as actresses to the winners. Ms Chaplin submitted her photograph and came first in her section, which entitled her to be considered for one of the twelve finalists. The notice reached her too late, and she was not able to make the appointment with Mr Hicks. She sued Mr Hicks for damages for breach of contract to compensate her for the loss of a chance to be selected for an engagement.

Judgment

The Court of Appeal upheld a £100 award for the loss of the chance at winning the contest, awarded by the

jury A jury is a sworn body of people (jurors) convened to hear evidence, make Question of fact, findings of fact, and render an impartiality, impartial verdict officially submitted to them by a court, or to set a sentence (law), penalty or Judgmen ...

. Vaughan Williams LJ dismissed the arguments that the damages were either (1) too remote or (2) unassessable.

Application

In a case relating to

planning permission Planning permission or building permit refers to the approval needed for construction or expansion (including significant renovation), and sometimes for demolition, in some jurisdictions. House building permits, for example, are subject to buil ...

, ''Obagi v Stanborough (Developments) Ltd.'' (1993),TLR Dec 15 Stanborough had been in breach of contract in failing to apply for planning permission. Obagi sought recovery of his loss of profit, i.e. the difference between the value of the site and what he would have had to pay for it. Mr Justice Blackburne considered that, so long as the chance was more substantial that "a mere possibility", there was no essential difference between the evaluation of the defendant's chances of getting planning permission and Ms Chaplin's chances of winning a prize in ''Chaplin v Hicks''. In this case Obagi had failed to demonstrate a real possibility and so the damages awarded were minimal.Atkinson, D.
Breach of Contract
published 1999, archived on 25 April 2010, accessed on 25 March 2025

References

{{Clist remedies English contract case law 1911 in British law 1911 in case law Court of Appeal (England and Wales) cases