LEGAL PRINCIPLE: CIVIL PROCEDURE – Remedies – Special Damages – Loss of Use – Necessity for Prompt Repairs to Mitigate Loss
PRINCIPLE STATEMENT
In cases of this nature, it is always expected of plaintiff to mitigate the loss suffered due to negligence of the defendant; it is incumbent upon them to get such damaged vehicle repaired at the earliest opportunity; this is the requirement of the law all over the world; it is not confined to Common Law, and it is based on common sense and reasonableness; to allow a party that is a victim of negligence time almost in perpetuity to leave their damaged object unrepaired and expect damages to be calculated against years rather than few days is giving a blank cheque to rake in undeserved compensation.
RATIO DECIDENDI (SOURCE)
"In cases of this nature, it is always expected of Plaintiff to mitigate the loss suffered due to negligence of the Defendant. It is incumbent upon him to get such damaged vehicle repaired at the earliest opportunity. This is the requirement of the law all over the world. It is not confined to Common Law, and it is based on common sense and reasonableness. To allow a party that is a victim of negligence time almost in perpetuity to leave his damaged object unrepaired and expect damages to be calculated against years rather than few days is giving a blank cheque to rake in undeserved compensation."
EXPLANATION / SCOPE
Plaintiffs must mitigate damages through prompt repairs. Duty: Get damaged property (vehicle, etc.) repaired at earliest opportunity—not indefinitely delay repairs while claiming ongoing loss. Universal requirement: Law worldwide (not just Common Law), based on: common sense, reasonableness, and preventing unjust enrichment. Why required: Prevents plaintiffs from: deliberately prolonging loss, inflating damages through delay, and profiting from negligence by avoiding repairs. “Almost in perpetuity” means: indefinite delay, unreasonable prolongation, and excessive period without mitigation. Unreasonable: Calculating damages over years when repairs would take days—allows undeserved compensation, creates windfall for plaintiff, and penalizes defendant excessively. “Blank cheque” means: unlimited damages, uncontrolled compensation, and unjust enrichment. This serves: reasonableness in damages, preventing plaintiff opportunism, and ensuring compensation not punishment. Application: Plaintiff claiming loss of use must: repair promptly, minimize period of loss, and calculate damages for reasonable repair period (days/weeks) not extended delay (months/years). If plaintiff: delays repairs unreasonably, refuses to mitigate, or prolongs loss deliberately—damages limited to reasonable mitigation period. This prevents: gaming the system, profiting from own failure to mitigate, and converting tort compensation into unjust windfall. The principle requires active mitigation—victims can’t passively allow losses to accumulate when reasonable steps would minimize them.