The principle of Injuria Sine Damnum underlines the legal axiom that violation of a legal right warrants remedy irrespective of actual damage. This paper delves into the seminal case of Ashby v. White (1703) 2 Ld. Raym 938, where a qualified voter was denied the right to vote, leading to the affirmation of legal redress despite the absence of material damage. Additionally, the contrasting principle of Damnum Sine Injuria, as illustrated in the Gloucester Grammar School Case (1410) Y.B. Hill 11, where no remedy was granted despite economic loss due to lawful competition, is also examined. These cases elucidate fundamental doctrines in tort law concerning the interplay of legal rights and remedies.

Introduction
The distinction between Injuria Sine Damnum and Damnum Sine Injuria forms the bedrock of tortious claims in common law. Ashby v. White serves as a quintessential case illustrating the former, wherein the violation of a legal right, notwithstanding the lack of quantifiable damage, entitles the aggrieved party to compensation. Conversely, the Gloucester Grammar School Case exemplifies the latter, where damages without an infringement of a legal right do not warrant judicial intervention. This dichotomy is pivotal in understanding the contours of legal rights and the requisite conditions for actionable claims.

Case Analysis: Ashby v. White (1703)
Facts
In Ashby v. White, the plaintiff, a duly qualified voter, was unlawfully prevented from casting his vote in an election by the defendant, the returning officer. Despite the plaintiff's preferred candidate winning the election, the plaintiff sought damages for the infringement of his legal right to vote.

Issues
The primary issue was whether a qualified voter who was wrongfully denied the right to vote could claim damages even if no tangible harm occurred, as his candidate had won the election.

Judgment
The court held in favor of the plaintiff, establishing the principle that the infringement of a legal right itself constitutes sufficient grounds for a claim. Lord Holt CJ emphasized that "every injury imports a damage, though it does not cost the party one farthing, and it is impossible to prove the contrary," thus underscoring the necessity of protecting legal rights.

Analysis
The decision in Ashby v. White underscores the legal doctrine that violation of a fundamental right, such as the right to vote, necessitates remedy irrespective of resultant damage. This case fortifies the principle that legal rights are intrinsic and their violation, per se, merits compensation. The ruling is seminal in reinforcing the notion that the law protects the sanctity of legal entitlements beyond mere economic or material losses.

Comparative Analysis: Gloucester Grammar School Case (1410)
Facts
In the Gloucester Grammar School Case, the defendant established a competing school adjacent to the plaintiff's institution. This competition led to the plaintiff reducing his fees to retain students, causing financial loss.

Issues
The issue at hand was whether the plaintiff could claim damages for economic loss caused by the lawful establishment of a competing school.

Judgment
The court ruled against the plaintiff, asserting that lawful competition does not constitute a violation of legal rights. The economic loss incurred was a consequence of market dynamics, and no legal remedy was warranted.

Analysis
The ruling in the Gloucester Grammar School Case elucidates the principle of Damnum Sine Injuria, where mere economic loss, absent the infringement of a legal right, does not entitle the aggrieved party to damages. This case highlights the importance of distinguishing between lawful acts causing loss and unlawful acts infringing upon legal rights.

Conclusion
The juxtaposition of Ashby v. White and the Gloucester Grammar School Case illuminates the foundational principles of tort law concerning the protection of legal rights and the requisite elements for actionable claims. While Ashby v. White asserts the imperative of remedying the violation of legal rights irrespective of material damage, the Gloucester Grammar School Case delineates the boundaries of legal redress in the context of lawful activities causing economic loss. Together, these cases provide a comprehensive understanding of the doctrines of Injuria Sine Damnum and Damnum Sine Injuria, reinforcing the nuanced interplay between legal rights and remedies in tort law.

References:

• Ashby v. White (1703) 2 Ld. Raym 938.
• Gloucester Grammar School Case (1410) Y.B. Hill 11.