Punitive Damages in UK Law

An award of compensation will go some distance towards vindicating the infringed constitutional right. The fact that the right violated was a constitutional right adds an extra dimension to the wrong. An additional award, not necessarily of substantial size, may be needed to reflect the sense of public outrage, emphasise the importance of the constitutional right and the gravity of the breach, and deter further breaches.

The purpose is to vindicate the right of the complainant, whether a citizen or a visitor, to carry on his or her life in the Bahamas free from unjustified executive interference, mistreatment or oppression. The sum appropriate to be awarded to achieve this purpose will depend upon the nature of the particular infringement and the circumstances relating to that infringement.

In an action for personal injuries the damages are always divided into two main parts. First, there is what is referred to as special damage which has to be specially pleaded and proved. This consists of out-of-pocket expenses and loss of earnings incurred down to the date of trial, and is generally capable of substantially exact calculation. Secondly, there is general damage which the law implies and is not specially pleaded.

It extends to cases in which the Defendant is seeking to gain at the expense of the Plaintiff some object,—perhaps some property which he covets,—which either he could not obtain at all or not obtain except at a price greater than he wants to put down. Exemplary damages can properly be awarded whenever it is necessary to teach a wrongdoer that tort does not pay.

Furthermore, the fact that the flagrancy of the infringement, with its overtones of dishonesty and intentional wrong-doing, is one of the factors specifically mentioned may well entitle the court to deal with the question of damages as it would in other cases of intentional wrong-doing: see the speech of Lord Browne-Wilkinson in Smith New Court v Scrimgeour Vickers [1977] AC 254, especially in his discussion of damages for deceit explaining what was said by Lord Blackburn in Livingston v Rawyards Coal (1880) 5 App Cas 25, and the speech of Lord Steyn on the same subject:

Such actions involve a money award which may put the plaintiff in a purely financial sense in a much stronger position than he was before the wrong. Not merely can he recover the estimated sum of his past and future losses, but, in case the libel, driven underground, emerges from its lurking place at some future date, he must be able to point to a sum awarded by a jury sufficient to convince a bystander of the baselessness of the charge.

They may also include natural injury to his feelings; the natural grief and distress which he may feel in being spoken of in defamatory terms; and if there has been any kind of high-handed, oppressive, insulting or contumelious behaviour by the defendant which increases the mental pain and suffering which is caused by the defamation and which may constitute injury to the plaintiff's pride and self-confidence, those are proper elements to be taken into account in a case where the damages are at large.