Chaplin v Hicks [1911] 2 KB 786

Facts

  • Hicks, a theatre manager, organized a beauty contest where entrants submitted photographs to be judged by public vote, leading to a final selection round.
  • Chaplin qualified for the final round but was notified too late by Hicks due to his failure to take reasonable steps to inform her.
  • Chaplin was consequently denied the opportunity to participate in the final round.
  • Chaplin sued Hicks for breach of contract, seeking damages for the lost opportunity to compete and potential prize earnings.

Issues

  1. Whether Chaplin could recover substantial damages for losing the chance to compete in a final selection, notwithstanding the uncertainty of outcome.
  2. Whether damages for such a lost opportunity were too remote or incapable of proper assessment.
  3. Whether the award of damages for the loss of chance required proof, on the balance of probability, that Chaplin would have won the competition.

Decision

  • The Court of Appeal rejected Hicks' argument that damages were too remote or speculative to award.
  • It held that Chaplin was entitled to substantial damages for the loss of the chance to compete, despite uncertainty regarding whether she would have ultimately won.
  • The Court established that the value of the lost opportunity could be assessed even if not precisely quantified.
  • The decision clarified that the uncertainty of outcome does not absolve the wrongdoer from compensating for the breach.

Legal Principles

  • A right to an opportunity under a contract is a valuable right, and loss of that chance due to breach is compensable.
  • Damages can be awarded for loss of chance even if it is not proven, on the balance of probabilities, that the claimant would have obtained the benefit had the chance not been lost.
  • The fact that damages cannot be assessed with certainty does not prevent their award.
  • The case distinguishes contractual loss of chance from the approach taken in tort, as highlighted by contrast with Hotson v East Berkshire HA [1987] AC 750.

Conclusion

Chaplin v Hicks [1911] 2 KB 786 confirmed that a claimant deprived of a valuable chance by breach of contract is entitled to damages, even in the face of outcome uncertainty, making loss of chance a foundational principle in contract law.

The answers, solutions, explanations, and written content provided on this page represent PastPaperHero's interpretation of academic material and potential responses to given questions. These are not guaranteed to be the only correct or definitive answers or explanations. Alternative valid responses, interpretations, or approaches may exist. If you believe any content is incorrect, outdated, or could be improved, please get in touch with us and we will review and make necessary amendments if we deem it appropriate. As per our terms and conditions, PastPaperHero shall not be held liable or responsible for any consequences arising. This includes, but is not limited to, incorrect answers in assignments, exams, or any form of testing administered by educational institutions or examination boards, as well as any misunderstandings or misapplications of concepts explained in our written content. Users are responsible for verifying that the methods, procedures, and explanations presented align with those taught in their respective educational settings and with current academic standards. While we strive to provide high-quality, accurate, and up-to-date content, PastPaperHero does not guarantee the completeness or accuracy of our written explanations, nor any specific outcomes in academic understanding or testing, whether formal or informal.
No resources available.

Job & Test Prep on a Budget

Compare PastPaperHero's subscription offering to the wider market

PastPaperHero
Monthly Plan
$10
Assessment Day
One-time Fee
$20-39
Job Test Prep
One-time Fee
$90-350

Note the above prices are approximate and based on prices listed on the respective websites as of May 2025. Prices may vary based on location, currency exchange rates, and other factors.

Get unlimited access to thousands of practice questions, flashcards, and detailed explanations. Save over 90% compared to one-time courses while maintaining the flexibility to learn at your own pace.

All-in-one Learning Platform

Everything you need to master your assessments and job tests in one place

  • Comprehensive Content

    Access thousands of fully explained questions and cases across multiple subjects

  • Visual Learning

    Understand complex concepts with intuitive diagrams and flowcharts

  • Focused Practice

    Prepare for assessments with targeted practice materials and expert guidance

  • Personalized Learning

    Track your progress and focus on areas where you need improvement

  • Affordable Access

    Get quality educational resources at a fraction of traditional costs

Tell Us What You Think

Help us improve our resources by sharing your experience

Pleased to share that I have successfully passed the SQE1 exam on 1st attempt. With SQE2 exempted, I’m now one step closer to getting enrolled as a Solicitor of England and Wales! Would like to thank my seniors, colleagues, mentors and friends for all the support during this grueling journey. This is one of the most difficult bar exams in the world to undertake, especially alongside a full time job! So happy to help out any aspirant who may be reading this message! I had prepared from the University of Law SQE Manuals and the AI powered MCQ bank from PastPaperHero.

Saptarshi Chatterjee

Saptarshi Chatterjee

Senior Associate at Trilegal