Reference no: EM133710201

Question

Solarum, a manufacturer of solar panels, sold solar panels to Fikile Construction. Fikile Construction was hired to install solar panels in newly developed townhouses. Fikile Construction contended that the solar panels that were sold to them were defective. They further contended that by the time they had realised that the solar panels were defective; they had already installed the defective solar panels on the roofs of fifteen (15) townhouses. They then had to remove the solar panels from the roofs of these fifteen (15) townhouses and reinstall new solar panels supplied by another manufacturer, Esolar, which cost R1 350 000. They paid transport costs of R18 000. The removal of the defective solar panels and the reinstallation of the new solar panels on the roofs of the fifteen (15) townhouses took them four (4) weeks to complete and cost them R400 000 in labour. Fikile Construction argued that the replacement of the solar panels that were bought from Esolar manufacturers were more expensive than the ones that they had agreed on in their contract with Solarum. With reference to the fundamental principle of damages for the breach of contract, explain in detail, how Fikile Construction's damages would be determined in this case.