English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Zendy Plus

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Zendy Tools

Zendy Open

Most jurisdictions subscribe to the common law rule that a plaintiff must be awarded actual damages before recovering punitive damages.' This rule stems from the view that without a finding of actual damages, there effectively exists no cause of action to support a punitive damage award.2 Moreover, a plaintiff who is unable to show damages worthy of compensation is seen by the common law as undeserving of the potential windfall provided by punitive damages.3 Despite the desirability of the common law rule, Congress forsook it in drafting civil rights legislation, most particularly Title VII.4 When Congress amended Title VII through the enactment of ? 1981a in 1991,5 it did not explicitly require that workplace discrimination plaintiffs be awarded actual damages before receiving punitive dam-

Keeping the "Civil" in Civil Litigation: The Need for a Punitive Damage: Actual Damage Link in Title VII Cases