Discuss. The law is not static and certain areas of law have been subject to much change. One of these areas, the law on damages for anxiety and disappointment in contract law, will be the subject of this essay. In particular, the changing scope of the importance of a contract’s object being pleasure or relaxation in order to be able to reward damages for mental distress will be examined. This essay will firstly explore the origin of the general rule from the case Addis v Gramophone Co Ltd, that damages are not available for non-pecuniary losses. Then, the so called ‘holiday cases’ Jarvis v Swans Tours Ltd and Jackson v Horizon Holidays Ltd, which gave rise to some exceptions to the general rule laid down in Addis will be covered. Following this, the various cases which changed the scope for awarding such damages since Jarvis and Jackson in the 1970s up to the present law under Farley v Skinner[4] will be discussed, forming the main body of the essay