The applicants sought a declaration that they had not provided guarantees to support a contract between a joint venture company owned by them, OnDigital, and the respondent to screen football matches. The company had become insolvent.
Held: The applicants had indicated in the initial bid document that they would guarantee the bid, but that guarantee had not been incorporated into the later documents. OnDigital was not able to bind the claimants. The bid had been renegotiated and reformulated before being signed. A guarantee had to be in writing, and the initial statement had been superceded. Subject to contract negotiations remain in negotiation until a formal contract is concluded. A company is not the agent of its shareholders. A declaration that the claimants had not guaranteed the contract was granted.
Judges:
The Honourable Mr Justice Langley
Citations:
[2002] EWHC 1650 (Comm)
Links:
Statutes:
Citing:
Cited – Tiverton Estates Ltd v Wearwell Ltd CA 1975
“Subject to Contract” not to be diluted
‘subject to contract’ proposals remain in negotiation until a formal contract is executed. Lord Denning MR said: ‘for over a hundred years, the courts have held that the effect of the words ‘subject to contract’ is that the matter remains in . .
Cited – Salomon v A Salomon and Company Ltd HL 16-Nov-1896
A Company and its Directors are not same paersons
Mr Salomon had incorporated his long standing personal business of shoe manufacture into a limited company. He held nearly all the shares, and had received debentures on the transfer into the company of his former business. The business failed, and . .
Cited by:
Cited – The Football League Ltd v Edge Ellison (A Firm) ChD 23-Jun-2006
The claimants operated football leagues, and asked the defendant solicitors to act in negotiating the sale of television rights to ONdigital. The broadcasts went ahead, but no guarantees were taken for the contract. The claimants alleged . .
Cited – Golden Ocean Group Ltd v Salgaocar Mining Industries Pvt Ltd and Another ComC 21-Jan-2011
The defendants sought to set aside orders allowing the claimants to serve proceedings alleging repudiation of a charterparty in turn allowing a claim against the defendants under a guarantee. The defendant said the guarantee was unenforceable under . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Contract, Media, Company
Updated: 06 June 2022; Ref: scu.174428
