Victoria Laundry (Windsor) Ltd v Newman Industries Ltd [1949] 2 KB 528

Facts

  • Victoria Laundry (Windsor) Ltd (VLL), a laundry business, contracted with Newman Industries Ltd (NIL) for the purchase of a large boiler needed for immediate use in VLL’s operations, including a dyeing service.
  • VLL informed NIL that the boiler was for immediate business use.
  • NIL delayed delivery of the boiler by approximately five months, breaching the agreement.
  • As a result, VLL claimed damages for lost profits due to the delay, specifically:
    • Ordinary profits lost from the delay to their general laundry business.
    • Exceptional profits lost from a lucrative government contract, which NIL did not know about.
  • VLL initiated proceedings seeking to recover both ordinary and exceptional losses.

Issues

  1. Whether VLL could recover losses for ordinary business profits caused by NIL's delayed delivery.
  2. Whether VLL could recover exceptional losses arising from a missed government contract that NIL was not aware of.
  3. What degree of foreseeability is necessary for a loss to be recoverable as damages for breach of contract.
  4. How remoteness of damage should be assessed when concurrent contract and tort claims arise.

Decision

  • The Court of Appeal held that VLL could recover damages for the ordinary profits lost due to the delayed delivery, as these losses were foreseeable and within NIL’s knowledge from the contract.
  • VLL could not recover damages for the exceptional profits lost from the missed government contract, as these were not within the contemplation of NIL and were not foreseeable based on the information NIL had at the time of contract formation.
  • The court clarified that losses are only recoverable if, at the time of contracting, they were either naturally arising from the breach (“ordinary losses”) or if special circumstances had been communicated to the contract breaker.
  • The degree of likelihood required was stated to be a “serious possibility” or a “real danger,” not absolute certainty.

Legal Principles

  • Only losses reasonably foreseeable by the parties at the time of contract formation are recoverable for breach of contract.
  • There is a distinction between ordinary losses (naturally arising from the breach and imputed to the parties) and exceptional losses (arising from special circumstances requiring actual communication to the contract breaker).
  • The test of remoteness is objective: a reasonable person in the contract breaker’s position must have foreseen the type of loss as a serious possibility.
  • Actual contemplation of the specific loss is not necessary; imputed or communicated knowledge suffices.
  • In concurrent contract and tort claims, the contractual remoteness test governs, and is stricter than the remoteness test in tort.

Conclusion

Victoria Laundry (Windsor) Ltd v Newman Industries Ltd [1949] 2 KB 528 established that recoverable damages for breach of contract are limited to losses that are reasonably foreseeable at the time of contracting, either arising naturally from the breach or from special circumstances known to both parties. The case clarifies that losses must be a serious possibility in the reasonable contemplation of the parties, and contractual remoteness prevails over tort remoteness in concurrent claims.

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