The correct answers are: The loss must arise naturally from the breach; The parties could have anticipated the manner of the loss when making the contract; The defendant must have been aware of any special circumstances.

This is the key case on remoteness of damage and establishes the principle that, in most cases, the damages claimed must have arisen naturally from the breach and it was possible for the parties to have anticipated them at the time the contract was made.

In the case of unusual losses (as in this case), the claimant will only succeed if the defendant had been made aware of the special circumstances at the same time.

The availability of insurance is never relevant.