Gloucester Grammar School Case (1410)

Quick Summary

The Court said: loss without a legal injury gives no action. The teacher lawfully opened a rival school and charged lower fees. Damnum sine injuria applies—there is damage, but no violation of a legal right.

• Competition is lawful when no right is infringed.
• Pure economic loss alone is not actionable in tort.
• Claim dismissed—no legal wrong shown.

Issues

1. Is the defendant liable for the plaintiff’s monetary loss caused by opening a rival school?
2. Does the case satisfy the essentials of damnum sine injuria?

Rules

• Damnum sine injuria: Damage without violation of a legal right is not actionable.
• Lawful competition: Starting a rival business, even nearby and cheaper, is lawful unless a right or duty is breached.
• Actionable tort: Requires infringement of a legal right or failure of a legal duty, not mere loss.

Arguments

Judgment

The Court held there was no liability. The defendant’s conduct was lawful and did not violate any legal right of the plaintiff. The case is a classic example of damnum sine injuria—loss without legal injury.

• Loss alone is not enough; a legal wrong is required.
• Rival trade with lower prices is not a tort by itself.

Ratio

Economic harm caused by lawful competition is not actionable. Without infringement of a legal right, courts do not grant damages.

Remember the pair: damnum sine injuria vs injuria sine damno.

Why It Matters

• Draws a clear line between business loss and legal wrong.
• Guides analysis in cases of pure economic loss.
• Useful starting point for competition-related tort questions.

Key Takeaways

• Loss ≠ Liability unless a legal right is violated.
• Lawful competition is not a tort.
• Always identify the right/duty before claiming damages.

Mnemonic + 3-Step Hook

Mnemonic: L-A-W — Loss alone? Action needs a right; Work of competition is lawful.

1. Spot the loss (what harm is claimed?).
2. Find the right (which legal right/duty was breached?).
3. Check lawfulness (is it fair competition or unlawful conduct?).

IRAC Outline

Issue: Is the teacher liable for the school’s financial loss by opening a cheaper, nearby school?

Rule: Damnum sine injuria—no action for loss without breach of a legal right; competition is lawful absent illegality.

Application: Defendant only opened a rival school and reduced fees. No right of the plaintiff was infringed.

Conclusion: No liability; claim dismissed.

Glossary

Damnum Sine Injuria

Damage without violation of a legal right; not actionable.

Injuria Sine Damno

Violation of a legal right without actual loss; actionable.

Pure Economic Loss

Financial loss unconnected to a physical or proprietary right; often not actionable in tort.

FAQs

Related Cases

• Ashby v. White — injuria sine damno principle.
• Mogul Steamship Co. — lawful competition and conspiracy to trade.
• Mayor of Bradford v. Pickles — motive vs legal right.