The plaintiffs contracted for the delivery and installation of equipment by the defendant. After delays and defects the claimants sought damages. The defendants said that the contract provided that any liabiity for consequential losses was to be limited to the value of the contract.
Held: The appeal failed. The cases had already settled the meaning of the phrase ‘consequential loss’ and ‘once a phrase has been authoritatively construed by a court in a very similar context to that which exists in the case in point, it seems to me that a reasonable businessman must more naturally be taken to be having the intention that the phrase should bear the same meaning as construed in the case in point. It would again take very clear words to allow a court to construe the phrase differently.’ In this case: ‘the parties simply agreed to limit the defendants’ liability for loss and damage not directly and naturally resulting from the defendants’ breach of contract to an amount equal to the value of the contract. ‘
Judges:
Evans LJ, Aldous LJ, Waller LJ
Citations:
(1998) 14 Const LJ 365, (1998) 14 Const LJ 365, [1997] EWCA Civ 2438, [1998] ITCLR 125, (1997) 87 BLR 45, [1997-98] Info TLR 353
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal from – British Sugar Plc v NEI Power Projects Ltd and Another QBD 21-Feb-1997
The parties had contracted for the design delivery and installation of electrical equipment. The claimant said that the defects in it led to losses. The defendant said that they were not liable for the losses which were consequentional and excluded . .
Cited – Millar’s Machinery Co Ltd v David Way and Son CA 1935
The contract provided that the seller would make good certain defects in workmanship, but the sellers stated: ‘We do not give any other guarantee and we do not accept responsibility for consequential damages.’
Held: The purchaser recovered the . .
Cited – Saint Line Limited v Richardsons Westgarth and Co. 1940
A clause excluding liability for ‘any indirect or consequential damages or claims whatsoever’. A claim was made for for loss of profit.
Held: ‘What does one mean by ‘direct damage’? Direct damage is that which flows naturally from the breach . .
Cited – Croudace Construction Limited v Cawoods CA 1978
A clause in a contract provided that: ‘We are not under any circumstances to be liable for any consequential loss or damage caused or arising by reason of late supply or any fault, failure or defect in any material or goods supplied by us or by . .
Cited by:
Cited – Pegler Ltd v Wang (UK) Ltd TCC 25-Feb-2000
Standard Conract – Wide Exclusions, Apply 1977 Act
The claimant had acquired a computer system from the defendant, which had failed. It was admitted that the contract had been broken, and the court set out to decide the issue of damages.
Held: Even though Wang had been ready to amend one or . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Damages, Contract
Updated: 09 November 2022; Ref: scu.142836
