Gloucester Grammar School Case
((1411), Y. B. 11 Hen. 4, f. 47, pi. 19)
FACT OF THE CASE:
In the Gloucester Grammar School Case, the defendant was a faculty teacher within the plaintiff’s school. thanks to some dispute, the defendant left the plaintiff’s school and found out a rival school next thereto of the plaintiff. because the defendant was famous amongst students for his teaching, boys from the plaintiff’s school left it and joined the defendant’s school. The plaintiff sued the defendant for the monetary loss caused.
- Does the defendant are going to be responsible for the loss suffered by the plaintiff by fixing a rival school and have damaged the right of the plaintiff ?
- Does this case not cover the essentials of ‘Damnum Sine Injuria’? and if yes then the defendant couldn’t be held liable?
In this Case, It was held that no suit could lie, the defendant wasn’t liable. Compensation is not any ground of action albeit the monetary loss is caused but if no right is violated. The defendant had lawfully found out his school and didn’t violate any legal rights of the plaintiff in doing so.
Also, the scholars earlier studying within the appellant’s school liked the teaching sort of the defendant, hence it had been their option to choose the institution to review in. The appellant couldn’t stop the defendant to run a business as a contest at his school.
In the case of Gloucester Grammar School the judgment of the court is whole heartily welcomed by me as consistent with the law of torts it fulfill every essential of Damnum Sine Injuria and there’s no infringement of the right of the plaintiff.
Law of Torts is understood to be “An instrument to form people adhere to conduct of reasonable behavior and respect the rights and interests of 1 another.”
And the same are kept in mind while giving the judgment of the case at the top of the decision of the law of court.