The defendant applied for partial summary judgment as to the interpretation of its contract with the claimant. OS argued that the contract provided for a one off supply. The claimant argued for a continuing obligation.
Held: The terms clearly envisaged the possibility of a continuing service. Other terms envisaged a one off supply. The contract was badly drafted. In view of the conflicting provisions, summary judgment was inappropriate and was refused.
Judges:
Arnold J
Citations:
[2018] EWHC 3524 (Pat)
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Intellectual Property, Contract
Updated: 18 May 2022; Ref: scu.634536
