The following excerpt is from Fidler v. Sun Life Assurance Co. of Canada, [2006] 2 SCR 3, 2006 SCC 30 (CanLII):
39 This holding in Jarvis emerged from the common law chrysalis as the “peace of mind exception” to the general rule against recovery for mental distress in contract breaches. This exception was confined to contracts which had as their object the peace of mind of a contracting party. Bingham L.J. in Watts v. Morrow stated: “Where the very object of [the] contract is to provide pleasure, relaxation, peace of mind or freedom from molestation, damages will be awarded” (p. 1445).
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.