The World is very wierd: a victim sues a hitman for not killing her. A Kent woman paid £20,000 to a hitman to kill her because she was depressed and wanted to die.
The hitman didn’t. So she complained to the police and at his trial he was ordered to return £2000 to her.
Geeklawyer would have left the police out of it and sought a mandatory injunction for specific performance. Or failing that, damages for non-performance where the quantum would be the cost of the rest of her life. sweeeet.
And there was me thinking you could not sue for damages for not performing an illegal act.
I wonder whether the hitman was also moonlighting as my plumber judging by th familiarity of the excuses for failure to undertake the work…
As I read it this couldn’t have been a case of suing for damages.This was a criminal trial, not a civil one. The £2000 seems to have been awarded as compensation for the criminal fraud, not as any sort of restitution on the “broken contract”. I don’t think she’d have gotten very far with a civil case.
Geeklawyer hates explaining humourous postings - but he is well aware of the effects of illegality in a contract.
With a view to reducing entropy in the universe may I clarify some general misunderstandings about this case: both parties met when they were receiving treatment for mental health problems. The “hitman” was prosecuted for deception and on conviction ordered to pay £2000 by way of compensation and required to serve a 15 month prison sentence.
I don’t think the Daily Mail would care for your factual analysis Ruth.
“Bonkers benefit claimant nets thousands in damages just for being alive”.
That’d make their readers feel better.
“Bonkers benefit claimant nets thousands in damages just for being alive”
Geeklawyer must start a spoof headline section.
Hilarious