| dbo:abstract
|
- Lewis v ACT is a decision of the High Court of Australia. The decision is a significant Australian Tort Law ruling for its holdings on the role of damages. The court unanimously ruled that a purported category of damages called "vindicatory damages" are not recognised as a distinct form of common law damages in Australia, as distinct from existing heads of damage such as nominal or compensatory damages. (en)
|
| dbo:thumbnail
| |
| dbo:wikiPageID
| |
| dbo:wikiPageLength
|
- 4775 (xsd:nonNegativeInteger)
|
| dbo:wikiPageRevisionID
| |
| dbo:wikiPageWikiLink
| |
| dbp:court
| |
| dbp:dateDecided
| |
| dbp:fullName
|
- Lewis v Australian Capital Territory (en)
|
| dbp:judges
|
- Kiefel CJ, Keane, Gageler, Gordon & Edelman JJ (en)
|
| dbp:name
| |
| dbp:opinions
|
- (en)
- appeal dismissed with costs (en)
|
| dbp:wikiPageUsesTemplate
| |
| dcterms:subject
| |
| rdfs:comment
|
- Lewis v ACT is a decision of the High Court of Australia. The decision is a significant Australian Tort Law ruling for its holdings on the role of damages. The court unanimously ruled that a purported category of damages called "vindicatory damages" are not recognised as a distinct form of common law damages in Australia, as distinct from existing heads of damage such as nominal or compensatory damages. (en)
|
| rdfs:label
| |
| owl:sameAs
| |
| prov:wasDerivedFrom
| |
| foaf:depiction
| |
| foaf:isPrimaryTopicOf
| |
| is dbo:wikiPageWikiLink
of | |
| is foaf:primaryTopic
of | |
