WASHINGTON, March 26 (UPI) --
Foreign high courts in the past abhorred punitive damages awarded by U.S. juries, but judicial shifts may be in play, recent court cases indicate.
For example, The New York Times noted Wednesday, the Italian Supreme Court once considered a $1 million Alabama judgment offensive because the damages far exceeded the loss. But the Tribunal Supremo in Spain enforced a $1.3 million punitive award in a Texas case and the Supreme Court of South Australia indicated favor for punitive damages in instances of "brazen and fraudulent conduct," the Times reported.
"Traditional hostility to American awards of such damages may be dissipating," Villanova law professor John Y. Gotanda wrote in a law journal last year, the Times noted.
Still, precedence holds the opinions of juries awarding damages is not an adequate substitute for a court decision, foreign courts say.
"The U.S. practice of permitting a lay jury to exercise largely discretionary judgment with limited constraints in awarding punitive damages is regarded almost universally outside the U.S. with a high degree of disfavor," Gary Born, an American lawyer working in London, told the Times.
There also are signs U.S. courts are starting to curtail awards. Five U.S. states banned or limited the amount of punitive damages and others imposed restrictions. And in 2003, the U.S. Supreme Court said the ratio between punitive and compensatory awards should be in the single digits.© 2008 United Press International. All Rights Reserved.
This material may not be reproduced, redistributed, or manipulated in any form.