[Liquidated Damages is not an Exhaustive Compensation for the Employer]

By

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Many thanks to my family, friends, colleagues and my instructor as without their support and guidance, this project would not have been completed.

DECLARATION

I declare that this project shows my own work developed by a thorough analysis of the secondary research and primary research study. Moreover, this study has not been published before.

ABSTRACT

The aim of this research is to understand if the Liquidated Damages is an Exhaustive Compensation for the Employer. The research used the secondary research analysis as the topic requires a comprehensive review of the literature on the case laws and the scholarly work to validate the research hypothesis. It was found that the liquidated damage claims can only be made if the cause for the injury by the second party has been justified in the court. This claim is relevant as despite the development of the best practices in the construction methods and the emergence of the computerized programming, there are numerous construction projects that still overrun their specified contract time frame. A delay means that the assets will ne to be used when it is originally intended. This creates operational issues for the employers. This may mean that the employer has to incur the additional cost and suffer delays in receiving project income. In this case, the liquidated damage clause has been found to be validating only if the breach has occurred and any of the party has come across the damage. This research will provide insight into the construction industry, the corporations and the directors about the issue and challenges of issues of breach and how the liquidated damage can ensure protection.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT2

DECLARATION3

ABSTRACT4

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION7

1.1 Background7

1.2 Research Aim8

1.3 Research Significance8

1.4 Research Questions9

1.5 Key Concepts9

1.5.1 Liquidated damages9

1.5.2 The Principle10

1.5.3 Purposes of Provision of Liquidated Damages10

1.5.4 Rules for Determining the Question11

1.5.5 Legal Provisions11

1.5.6 Construction Context: Builder's Liability12

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW13

2.1 Understanding Liquidated Damages13

2.2 Liquidated Damages and Exhaustive Compensation14

2.3 The Concept of Damages15

2.4 Benefit of the Creditor16

2.5 Types of Contractual Penalties16

2.6 Reasons for Penalty18

2.7 Debtor's Obligation to Pay Liquidated Damages19

2.8 Limit of Liability20

2.9 Examples of the Penalty Claim20

2.9.1 Legal Basis20

2.9.2 Damage Arising from Work22

2.10 Administrative Burden as Damages24

CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY26

3.1 Research Design26

3.2 Reason for Selecting the Secondary Research26

3.3 Research Execution27

3.4 Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria28

3.5 Secondary Data Collection28

3.5.1 The Law Cases Reports28

3.5.2 Scholarly Journals29

3.5.3 Literature Review Articles29

3.5.4 Case Journals29

3.5.5 Reference Books29

3.6 Data Analysis30

3.6 Ensuring Validity31

3.7 Limitations32

CHAPTER 4: FINDINGS AND ANALYSIS33

4.1 Payability of the Liquidated Damage when they are Imposed33

4.2 Returnability Only If Liquidated Damages Suffered Legal Injury34

4.3 Terms34

4.4 Non-performance and improper performance of obligations35

4.6 Similarities and Differences between the Penalty and Compensation38

4.6.1 Similarities38

4.6.2 Differences38

4.7 Reasons of the Penalty Claim39

4.8 Liquidated damages and loss39

4.9 The Rationale and Scope of the Penalty39

4.10 Exclusion of Non-Monetary Obligations40

4.11 Protection of the debtor41

4.12 Limitation of Claims for a Penalty42

4.13 Summary of the Findings42

4.13.1 Damages in rigorous legal corset44

4.13.2 Criteria for the legal classification45

CHAPTER 5: DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION47

5.1 Requirement for Exhaustive Compensation: Practice Pointers47

5.2 Execution of the Contract by the ...