

Links: Home \| swarblaw - law discussions		swarb.co.uk - law index These cases are from the lawindexpro database. They are now being transferred to the swarb.co.uk website in a better form. As a case is published there, an entry here will link to it. The swarb.co.uk site includes many later cases. Â
		Contract - From: 2003 To: 2003 This page lists 143 cases, and was prepared on 20 May 2019. Â R G Kensington Management Co Ltd v Hutchinson IDH Ltd [2003] 2 P and CR 13 2003 ChD Neuberger J Land, Contract Neuberger J decided that he could not follow the court in Jelson, saying: "The defendant's case is that the reference to "the parties" in s.2(3) is to the parties to the proposed conveyance or transfer. Two strands of authority are put forward as supporting that contention. First, that the purpose of s. 2 was to introduce a new and strict regime in relation to contracts for the creation or transfer of interests in land, can be seen from observations of the Court of Appeal in First Post Home Ltd v. Johnson [1995] 1 W.L.R. 1567 at 1571B to H, and McCausland v. Duncan Laurie & Partners [1997] 1 W.L.R. 38 at 44G. Secondly, the result for which the defendant contends is compelled by the reasoning and decision at first instance in this division of Mr David Mackie Q.C. in Jolson [sic] Ltd v. Derby County Council [1999] 3 E.G.L.R. 1991. Despite these authorities, I reject the defendant's case on s.2. The purpose and effect of s.2 is to be assessed by reference to the words used by the legislature, and nothing said by the Court of Appeal suggests otherwise. Those words are to be given their natural meaning unless there is some very good reason to the contrary. The closing words of s.2(3) require the contract, or the parts of the contract to be signed by 'each party to the contract', not by 'each party to the prospective conveyance or transfer'. In this case that means that the freehold agreement must be signed by the parties to it, the defendant and Mr Caan. Kensington is not a party to the freehold agreement and, as it is not a party to that contract, it seems there is no reason to require it to sign it. I see no reason to give an artificial meaning to s.2(3) as the defendant's argument involves, nor do I consider it permissible to do so. Mr Dowding, in his concise submissions on this issue, said that it would be consistent with the spirit of s.2 if a contract such as the freehold agreement could only be enforced in Kensington's favour if it could be enforced against Kensington. I accept, that the freehold agreement could not be enforced against Kensington unless Kensington had signed it. Accordingly, I see the force of the point, but there is nothing to suggest that the legislature had that sort of consideration in mind when enacting s.2. To give s.2 the meaning and effect that the defendant contends for, would involve an impermissible re-writing and extension or extension of s.2(3). It would also involve giving s.2 a greater degree of interference with Common Law rights and freedom to contract than it naturally bears. I am not obliged to follow Jolson, but I should only depart from it if I am satisfied that it was wrongly decided, I am clear in my mind that it cannot be supported. It is fair to say that, at least judging from the report, it appears that the simple argument as to why s.2 does not preclude the enforcement of a contract such as the freehold agreement, which causes me to reject the defendant's case, does not seem to have been raised in terms in Jolson—see the summary of the losing argument at [1999] 3 EGLR 96 B to E." Law of Property (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1989 82 1 Cites 1 Citers Â Â Ministry of Sound (Ireland) Ltd v World Online Ltd; ChD 2003 - [2003] EWHC 2178 Â Dexter Ltd v Vlieland-Boddy [2003] EWCA Civ 14 2003 CA Clarke LJ, Scott Baker LJ Estoppel, Contract, Litigation Practice The court discussed the significance of Johnson v Gore Wood. Clarke LJ: "The principles to be derived from the authorities, of which by far the most important is Johnson v Gore Wood & Co [2002] 2 AC 1, can be summarised as follows: i) Where A has brought an action against B, a later action against B or C may be struck out where the second action is an abuse of process. ii) A later action against B is much more likely to be held to be an abuse of process than a later action against C. iii) The burden of establishing abuse of process is on B or C or as the case may be. iv) It is wrong to hold that because a matter could have been raised in earlier proceedings it should have been, so as to render the raising of it in later proceedings necessarily abusive. v) The question in every case is whether, applying a broad merits based approach, A's conduct is in all the circumstances an abuse of process. vi) The court will rarely find that the later action is an abuse of process unless the later action involves unjust harassment or oppression of B or C." 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â Kepple-Palmer v Exus Travel [2003] EWHC 3529 (QB) 2003 QBD Gage J Damages, Contract Gage J considered a holiday disappointment claim saying: "In my opinion the claimant is entitled to a sum representing diminution in value of the holiday. In assessing this sum I take into account that this was on any view a very expensive holiday. As such, the claimant and her party were entitled to expect very high standards. As I have found, what she was provided with fell well below these high standards. Doing the best I can, and taking into account what was provided, the location and the time of year, I assess damages under this head in the sum of £22,000 as will be obvious, I calculate this on the basis of a deduction of some 25% from the contract price. In my opinion she is entitled to a sum representing loss of enjoyment. In this respect, I take into account that this was designed to be a very luxurious holiday, coming after her, and her family's, difficult year. This is, however, not the case of a family unused to holidays. To be able to afford the cost of such a holiday indicates a degree of financial resources from which I infer that that the claimant and her family are used to some of the more expensive things in life, including regular holidays. For that reason, in my judgment, the sum for the loss of the enjoyment must be modest; I assess it in the sum of £3,000." 1 Citers Â Â Tennaro Ltd v Majorarch; 2003 - [2003] EWHC 2601 Â Co-Operative Group (Cws) Ltd (Formerly Co-Operative Wholesale Society Ltd) v International Computers Ltd [2003] EWHC 1 (TCC) 13 Jan 2003 TCC Contract, Torts - Other 1 Cites 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â Dougland Support Services v Allscan Services Ltd [2003] EWCA Civ 61 23 Jan 2003 CA Contract [ Bailii ] Â Import Export Metro Ltd and Another v Compania Sud Americana De Vapores S A [2003] EWHC 11 (Comm); [2003] 1 Lloyds Rep 405 23 Jan 2003 ComC Jurisdiction, Contract 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â Triton Navigation Ltd v Vitol S A [2003] EWHC 46 (Comm) 23 Jan 2003 ComC Transport, Contract [ Bailii ] Â London Underground Ltd v Pillar Broadway Ltd [2003] EWHC 28 (TCC) 23 Jan 2003 TCC Contract [ Bailii ] Â Procter and Gamble (Health and Beauty Care) Ltd and others v Carrier Holdings Ltd and Another [2003] EWHC 83 (TCC) 24 Jan 2003 TCC Negligence, Contract, Limitation [ Bailii ] Â Sunport Shipping Limited, Prometheus Maritime Corporation, Celestial Maritime Corporation, Surzur Overseas Limited v Tryg-Baltica International (Uk) Ltd (Formerly Know As Colonia Baltica Insurance Ltd) and others Times, 03 February 2003; [2003] EWCA Civ 12; Gazette, 20 March 2003; [2003] 1 All ER (Comm) 586; [2003] 1 LLR 138; [2003] Lloyds Rep IR 349 24 Jan 2003 CA Mr Justice Scott Baker, Lord Justice Clarke, Lord Justice Peter Gibson Insurance, Transport, Contract The insurance policy incorporated standard provisions which excluded cover for 'loss damage arising from detainment by reason of infringement of any customs or trading regulations.' The ship was detained and the insurers refused payment. Held: The term 'customs regulations', in a marine insurance law, had to be construed widely enough to include rules allowing the detention of a ship for contravention of controlled drugs and other prohibited goods laws. Clarke LJ described the Hooley Hill Rubber principle as: "essentially a principle of construction. Thus the court is trying to ascertain the intention of the parties in using the expression deployed in the contract. Where a contract has been professionally drawn, as in the case of the Institute Clauses, the draftsman is certain to have in mind decisions of the courts on earlier editions of the clause. Such decisions are part of the context or background circumstances against which the particular contract falls to be construed. If the draftsman chooses to adopt the same words as previously construed by the courts, it seems to me to be likely that, other things being equal, he intends that the words should continue to have the same meaning." 1 Cites 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â Insured Financial Structures Ltd v Elektrocleplownia Tychy SA Times, 31 January 2003 28 Jan 2003 CA Woolf LCJ, Hale, Latham LJJ Jurisdiction, Contract The parties to a contract had agreed that Poland should have non-exclusive jurisdiction over disputes. Poland was not a party to the Lugano Convention, but both parties were domiciled in contracting states. Held: The agreement had extended exclusive jurisdiction to the Polish courts through article 17 of the Convention. The agreement must first be interpreted against English law as against the Convention, following Kurtz Lugano Convention on Jurisdiction and Enforcement of Judgments in Civil and Commercial Matters 17(1) 1 Cites Â Darke v Strout [2003] EWCA Civ 176 28 Jan 2003 CA Family, Contract, Child Support Abstention in exercising of a statutory right to apply for child maintenance may afford sufficient consideration to support a compromise of a contractual claim. 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â Joyce Chaitlal and Ganga Persad Chaitlal (in substitution for Kanhai Mahase, deceased) Dhanierami Jaglal and Maharani Jaglal v Chanderlal Ramlal [2003] UKPC 12 5 Feb 2003 PC Lord Hope of Craighead, Lord Hutton, Lord Scott of Foscote, Lord Walker of Gestingthorpe, Sir Martin Nourse Commonwealth, Land, Contract PC (Trinidad and Tobago) The purchaser sought specific performance of an open contract for the sale of land. Held: If and in so far as a contract for the sale of land does not specify a time for completion, the law allows an implication that completion is to take place after a time which is reasonable in all the circumstances. 1 Citers [ PC ] - [ Bailii ] - [ PC ] Â Habton Farms (an Unlimited Company) v Nimmo Times, 07 February 2003; [2003] EWCA Civ 68; [2003] 3 WLR 633; [2004] QB 1 6 Feb 2003 CA Auld, Clarke, Jonathan Parker, LJJ Animals, Contract, Damages, Agency The first defendant had arranged for the purchase of a racehorse from the claimant, wrongly claiming to be acting as agent for the second defendant. The claimant did not then put forward the horse for sale in subsequent auctions, but then the horse contracted peritonitis and died. Held: The first defendant was liable for breach of warranty of authority. Since the claimant had decided not to put the horse in the auction because he considered the horse to have been sold already, the damages were not to be reduced by what might have been recovered at auction, because that failure derived from the sale itself. [ Bailii ] Â Bovis Lend Lease Ltd v RD Fire Protection Ltd [2003] EWHC 939 (TCC) 6 Feb 2003 TCC Thornton QC HHJ Construction, Contract [ Bailii ] Â Crawford, Regardless Limited and Crawford v Financial Institutions Services Limited [2003] UKPC 12 6 Feb 2003 PC Lord Hutton, Lord Hobhouse of Woodborough, Lord Scott of Foscote Commonwealth, Constitutional, Contract PC Jamaica - petition for special leave to appeal to Her Majesty in Council from a judgment of the Court of Appeal of Jamaica dated 31 July 2001. The petitioners are Donovan Crawford, Regardless Ltd and Alma Crawford, the defendants in the proceedings at trial and the appellants in the Court of Appeal. 1 Citers [ PC ] - [ Bailii ] - [ PC ] Â Marlton v Tectronix UK Holdings [2003] EWHC 383 (Ch) 10 Feb 2003 ChD Pumfrey J Litigation Practice, Contract The court considered what was to be discovered under Part 31.4.1 of CPR. Pumfrey J expressly approved the commentary in the White Book: "A computer database which forms part of the business records for company is, in so far as it contains information capable of being received and converted into readable form, a document for the purposes of CPR 31.4 and is therefore susceptible to disclosure." Civil Procedure Rules 31.4.1 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â Monecor (London) Limited v Euro Brokers Holdings Limited [2003] EWCA Civ 105 11 Feb 2003 CA Lord Justice Mummery Lord Justice Waller Lord Justice Pill Company, Contract [ Bailii ] Â Bim Kemi Ab v Blackburn Chemicals Ltd [2003] EWCA Civ 106 13 Feb 2003 CA Waller LJ Contract 1 Cites 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â Jindal Iron and Steel Co Ltd and others v Islamic Solidarity Company Jordan Inc and Another [2003] EWCA Civ 144; [2003] 2 Lloyd's Rep 87 13 Feb 2003 CA Transport, Contract The question was whether a carrier is liable to cargo owners when the latter, or their stevedores, perform their duties improperly or carelessly; whether an agreement which transfers responsibility for these operations from the shipowners to shippers, charterers or consignees, is invalidated by article III, r. 8 of the Rules. The charterparty purported to transfer responsibility for loading, stowage and discharge from the shipowners to shippers, charterers and consignees. It was questioned whether the assignment was valid under the Rules Hague-Visby Rules A2 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â Petromec Inc v Petroleo Brasileiro S A Petrobras and others [2003] EWHC 179 (Comm) 18 Feb 2003 ComC Contract, Insurance 1 Cites 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â Â HIH Casualty and General Insurance Limited and others v Chase Manhattan Bank and others; HL 20-Feb-2003 - [2003] UKHL 6; [2003] 1 All ER Comm 349; [2003] 2 Lloyd's Law Reports 61; [2004] ICR 1708; [2003] Lloyds Rep IR 230; [2003] 1 CLC 358 Â Cyprotex Discovery Ltd v University of Sheffield [2003] EWHC 760 (TCC) 21 Feb 2003 TCC Intellectual Property, Contract Copyright in a Java-based software program partly adapted and derived from an earlier MathCAD-based program. Interpretation of uncertain and potentially nonsensical terms of a commercial contract and effect of ICS v West Bromwich Building Society and United Camp Chemicals Limited v ACE Insurance; retrospective effect of a contract and effect of Trollope & Colls v Atomic Power Station and Northern & Shell Plc v John Laing Construction Limited; retention of copyright and Warwick Film Production Ltd v Eisinger; joint authorship and Fylde Microsystems Ltd v Key Radio Systems Ltd and implication of terms governing copyright and Ray v Classic FM. [ Bailii ] Â Lomax Leisure Limited v Fabric London Limited [2003] EWHC 307 (Ch) 26 Feb 2003 ChD The Honourable Mr Justice Peter Smith Contract [ Bailii ] Â Day Morris Associates v Voyce and Another [2003] EWCA Civ 189 26 Feb 2003 CA Lord Justice Sedley Mrs Justice Black Agency, Contract, Civil Procedure Rules The claimant estate agents appealed dismissal of their claim for commission. The owners were splitting up, and there was to begin with no clear instruction to market the property. Later the property was sold privately, but to a buyer introduced by the claimant to Mrs Voyce. The agent asked the court to go beyond its normal appellate function to remedy a defect in the trial in that the judge had relied upon a point unargued by the parties, as to whether Mrs Voyce had accepted the offer to act. Held: The parties wre given some latitude in the scope of their arguments. The judge had not clearly identified the contractual history. A contractual acceptance has to be a final and unqualified expression of assent to the terms of the offer. Here Mrs Voyce's behaviour had been enough to constitute such acceptance. Appeal allowed. Civil Procedure Rules 52.11(3)(b) [ Bailii ] Â Cable and Wireless Plc v IBM United Kingdom Ltd [2003] EWHC 335 (Comm) 27 Feb 2003 ComC Contract [ Bailii ] Â Isoft Group Plc v Misys Holdings Limited Misys Plc [2003] EWCA Civ 229 28 Feb 2003 CA Lord Justice Buxton Lord Justice Simon Brown Lord Justice Carnwath Contract [ Bailii ] Â Leicester Circuits Ltd v Coates Brothers Plc [2003] EWCA Civ 290 5 Mar 2003 CA Contract 1 Cites 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â T Mobile (Uk) (A Partnership) v Bluebottle Investments SA, Bluebottle UK Limited, Virgin Mobile Telecom Limited [2003] EWHC 379 (Comm) 6 Mar 2003 ComC The Honourable Mr Justice Cooke Contract [ Bailii ] Â Sun Life Assurance Company of Canada (A Company Established Pursuant To the Laws of Canada) v CX Reinsurance Company Limited (Formerly CNA Reinsurance Company Ltd) [2003] EWCA Civ 283 6 Mar 2003 CA Lord Justice Potter Mr Justice Lawrence Collins Lord Justice Carnwath Insurance, Contract The claimant appealed a refusal to order that a dispute between insurer and re-insurer be referred to arbitration. One party sought to avoid liability under the policy, alleging misrepresentation. Discussions had been undertaking settling a revised form of agreement, but the forms had not been signed. The judge had held that the new document formal and was not intended to take effect until signed. Held: In the insurance and reinsurance market the concern is usually upon the terms agreed and the necessity for signature at the outset when the insurance contract is made (usually by slip), rather than on any subsequent additional treaty terms which are regarded as a relative formality. Here the parties intended to be bound by the document signed unless and until replaced by any formal and signed addendum. Appeal dismissed. 1 Cites [ Bailii ] Â Corozal Free Zone Development Ltd v Flynagen Ltd (Belize) [2003] UKPC 20 10 Mar 2003 PC Lord Bingham of Cornhill, Lord Steyn, Lord Hoffmann, Lord Millett, Lord Scott of Foscote Land, Commonwealth, Contract PC Belize [ PC ] - [ Bailii ] Â Clegg v Olle Andersson (T/A Nordic Marine) [2003] EWCA Civ 320; Times, 14 April 2003; Gazette, 22 May 2003; [2003] 2 Lloyd's Rep 32 11 Mar 2003 CA Lady Justice Hale The Vice-Chancellor Lord Justice Dyson Contract, Consumer The claimant agreed to purchase a yacht from the defendants with a keel to the manufacturer's standard specifications. The keel actually installed was rather heavier. After correspondence, the claimant rejected the yacht and required the return of the the purchase price. The respondent said the exercise of a right of rejection was unreasonable, given that the manufacturer had offered to correct the defect. Held: Though a repair had been undertaken the right to reject had not been lost. The buyer had maintained his demand for information about the defect. Whether or not a buyer has had a reasonable time to inspect the goods is only one of the questions to be answered in ascertaining whether there has been acceptance in accordance with subsection (4). Subsection (6)(a) shows that time taken merely in requesting or agreeing to repairs for carrying them out, is not to be counted. The purchasers' failure to mitigate their loss became irrelevant when the right of rejection was used. There is no requirement that the exercise of the right of rejection should be subject to any condition of reasonableness. Sale of Goods Act 1979 13(1) 14(2) 1 Cites 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â Â Homburg Houtimport BV v Agrosin Private Ltd (the 'Starsin'); HL 13-Mar-2003 - [2003] UKHL 12; Times, 17 March 2003; Gazette, 15 May 2003; [2003] 2 WLR 711; [2004] 1 AC 715; [2003] 1 CLC 921; 2003 AMC 913; [2003] 1 Lloyd's Rep 571; [2003] 1 All ER (Comm) 625; [2003] 2 All ER 785; [2003] 1 LLR 571 Â Staines v Walsh, Howard [2003] EWHC 458 (Ch) 14 Mar 2003 ChD The Hon Mr Justice Goldring Jurisdiction, Civil Procedure Rules, Contract The claimant sought an account from the defendant share broker for the proceeds of share transactions. The defendant said the matter should be tried in Hong Kong. Held: The claimant must show a good arguable case. Here there was evidence to support the claimant's assertion of the use of an address in England, and a case was therefore shown. There were clear English connections, and the contract was asserted to have been made in England. England was the forum conveniens. Civil Procedure Rules 6.20 - Contracts (Applicable Law) Act 1990 - Rome Convention 3 1 Cites [ Bailii ] Â SMAY Investments Ltd and Another v Sachdev and others [2003] EWHC 474 (Ch); [2003] 1 WLR 1973 14 Mar 2003 ChD Company, Contract, Jurisdiction If conduct on the part of a defendant is to amount to a submission to jurisdiction that conduct must be unequivocal in nature. [ Bailii ] Â Morin v Bonhams and Brooks Ltd and Another [2003] EWHC 467 (Comm); [2003] 2 All ER (Comm) 36; [2003] ILPr 25 18 Mar 2003 ComC Jonathan Hirst QC Contract, Torts - Other Claim for rescission of contract for purchase of Ferrari car at auction after discovery of alteration to odometer. Jonathan Hirst QC said (after discussing the Christie's case): "Plainly this authority provides substantial ammunition for B&B Monaco to contend that they owed no duty of care to [the claimant] but, if English law applied, I would hold that he had surmounted the fairly low threshold of showing a reasonable prospect of success on this point for the following reasons. (a) But for the conditions of sale, there could be little doubt that B&B Monaco owed a duty of care. (b) The decision in De Balkany's case on whether Christie's owed any duty in tort was expressly obiter and moreover it would appear that the court was not addressed on the impact of s 2(2) of the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977. (c) The conditions of sale in this case are not the same as Christie's in the case. (d) In particular, cl 3 is prefaced with the following: 'whilst every effort has been made to ensure the accuracy of the description'. I think it is arguable that the exclusions of liability which ensue proceed on the assumption that every effort has indeed been made by B&B Monaco and that if every (reasonable) effort has not been made the exclusions are not to be effective to exclude a duty of care. It is right to bear in mind that these are B&B Monaco's conditions of sale, and they should be construed contra proferentem". 1 Cites 1 Citers [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] Â William Alexander McLennan and Wilson I McLennan and Others v The Attorney General [2003] UKPC 25 19 Mar 2003 PC Lord Slynn of Hadley, Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead, Lord Hutton, Lord Millett, Lord Rodger of Earlsferry Commonwealth, Land, Contract PC (New Zealand) Land had been acquired by compulsory purchase, but was no longer needed. Offers were made for the sale but lapsed. Further offers and counter offers were made. Held: The statutory requirement to sell did not allow additional terms and conditions. Equally there was no ability for the offeree to extend the time for acceptance, and the Crown became free to sell the land on the terms it could negotiate. An acceptance was conditional, and amounted to a counter-offer which was not accepted and there was no binding contract. Public Works Act 1981 (New Zealand) 40(5) 1 Cites [ PC ] - [ Bailii ] - [ PC ] Â H L Estates Limited, Wynford Newman Dore v Parker-Lake Homes Limited [2003] EWHC 604 (Ch) 20 Mar 2003 ChD Her Honour Judge Frances Kirkham Contract, Land 1 Cites [ Bailii ] Â Fleming and Wendeln Gmbh and Co v Sanofi Sa/Ag [2003] EWHC 561 (Comm) 20 Mar 2003 ComC Contract, Arbitration The parties concluded a contract for the sale and purchase of 20,000MT up to 30,000MT at Sellers' option Russian/Ukrainian black sunseed crop 1997. The price was to "be fixed for each shipment latest 15 days prior delivery … In case Buyers/Sellers don't find an agreement Sellers keep the right to re-sell part or totality of the mensuality on the free market and this contract will confirm[ed] by the broker as a proof of the fulfilment of the contractual obligations for the mensuality concerned." As to delivery, the contract provided:- "November 1997/March 1998 for quantity equally spread for each delivery but with possibility to cumulate part or totality of one mensuality to the next one if both Buyers and Sellers agreed upon." The contract contained further provisions as to Quality, Payment, Loading Rate, Special Conditions and Brokerage. The contract further provided "All Other terms conditions as per ctr GAFTA 78 Arbitration London 125". Thus the contract incorporated GAFTA form 78 (Contract for Bulk Grain and Pulses by Rail effective 1.1.95) and the arbitration rules set out in GAFTA form 125. Certain deliveries were made under the contract. By early 1998 a substantial quantity (12,250/22, 250 tonnes Sellers' option) remained undelivered. Disputes arose concerning the delivered parcels and the undelivered balance. A GAFTA first-tier arbitration tribunal was appointed. The court was to consider the size of any undelivered balance of the Contract; whether Sellers were in default for failure to deliver; and if so, the damages. Appeal dismissed. 1 Cites [ Bailii ] Â Tavoulareas v Tsavliris and others [2003] EWHC 550 (Comm) 21 Mar 2003 ComC Tomlinson J Contract, Transport 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â Islam v Ali [2003] EWCA Civ 612 26 Mar 2003 CA Auld LJ Contract, Costs For a costs appeal to succeed it must be established that the judge has exceeded the limits of his proper discretion by the order made. Auld LJ said that the Court should only intervene: "the judge has either erred in principle in his approach, or has left out of account, or taken into account, some feature that he should, or should not, have considered, or that [the exercise of] his discretion is wholly wrong because the court is forced to the conclusion that he has not balanced the various factors fairly in the scale." 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â A L Barnes Ltd v Time Talk (UK) Ltd [2003] EWCA Civ 402; Times, 09 April 2003; [2003] BLR 331 26 Mar 2003 CA Costs, Contract The claimant appealed a costs order which had denied him the substantial part of his costs despite feeling that he had won the case. The court had said that no order should be made for payment of the expert witness' costs of either party. Held: The judge had erred. He should first have asked which was the successful party, before then exercising his discretion, rather than first separating out one issue, and then making that judgment. The claimant was entitled in the circumstances of this case to recover 25% of his costs. 1 Cites [ Bailii ] Â Cma Cgm S A v Classica Shipping Company Ltd [2003] EWHC 641 (Comm) 27 Mar 2003 ComC Contract, Transport 1 Cites 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â Pickering and Another v Deacon t/a J A McConville Times, 19 April 2003; Gazette, 29 May 2003 27 Mar 2003 CA Contract The claimants appealed an order to pay their builder. They said that though unpleaded, in fact the original contract was illegal and should not be enforced. The agreement had been to inflate the cost artificially so as to increase a claim for a grant, and then to share the excess cost. Held: There appeared to have been a conspiracy to defraud. The court should not however act upon the basis that such a conspiracy existed unless and until it was satisfied that it had all the circumstances before it. The evidence of an unpleaded fraud should not have been admitted. Â Evergreen Marine Corp v Aldgate Warehouse (Wholesale) Ltd [2003] EWHC 667 (Comm) 28 Mar 2003 ComC Transport, Contract The claimant sought payment for freight charges and demurrage. Long standing arrangements meant that the defendant was not named as shipper. Held: The f.o.b. contract has become a flexible instrument and it does not necessarily follow that the buyer is an original party to the contract of carriage. Each of the contracts of carriage was made between Evergreen and the shipper named in the bill of lading. In the ordinary way Aldgate would have become a party to those contracts of carriage when the bills of lading were indorsed and delivered to it against payment of the price of the goods. However, the bills of lading in this case never were transferred to Aldgate and Aldgate did not become a party to them. The claim for freight and demurrage failed. 1 Cites [ Bailii ] Â Choudry and others v Triesman Times, 02 May 2003; Gazette, 05 June 2003; [2003] EWHC 1203 (Comm) 31 Mar 2003 ChD Stanley Burton J Elections, Contract The applicants sought an order requiring the respondent general secretary of the Labour Party to allow them to stand as candidates for the party in the forthcoming local elections. After allegations about the way in which selection had been carried out, the party imposed its own candidates. Held: The principles for the grant of mandatory interim injunctions had been laid down in Nottingham Building Society. Here, a serious triable issue had been raised, but the risk of injustice would be greater if the injunction were granted than if not. If granted the party would not have the election candidates of its choice, but if not granted, the candidates would still be able to stand for election. Stanley Burton J said of the Labour Party: "Its constitution is contained in its rules contained in the rule book, which constitute a contract to which each member adheres when he joins the party" 1 Cites 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â Actionstrength Limited v International Glass Engineering In Gl En SpA and others [2003] UKHL 17; Times, 04 April 2003; [2003] 2 AC 541; [2003] 2 WLR 1060; [2003] 1 CLC 1003; [2003] 2 All ER (Comm) 331; [2003] 2 All ER 615; [2003] BLR 207; 88 Con LR 208 3 Apr 2003 HL Lord Bingham of Cornhill, Lord Woolf, Lord Hoffmann, Lord Clyde, Lord Walker of Gestingthorpe Contract, Estoppel Actionstrength agreed with Inglen to provide construction staff to build a factory for St-Gobain. Inglen failed to pay. Actionstrength claimed against for the amount due. Inglen went into liquidation. The claim was now against St-Gobain. The claim was based on an alleged oral guarantee. When the defendant pleaded the Statute of Frauds, the claimant alleged an estoppel, saying the defendant had urged it to continue to supply workers. Held: Some recognisable structural framework must be established before recourse could be had to the underlying idea of unconscionable conduct. It needed to be shown that Actionstrength assumed that St-Gobain would honour the guarantee; that that assumption was induced or encouraged by St-Gobain; and that Actionstrength relied on that assumption. They had not established all these elements. These factors could not all be found in the pleadings. The only assurance given to Actionstrength was the promise itself. In order to be estopped from invoking the statute there must be something more, such as some additional encouragement, inducement or assurance. In addition to the promise there must be some influence exerted by St-Gobain on Actionstrength to lead it to assume that the promise would be honoured. However there was no suggestion made that St-Gobain said or did anything to lead Actionstrength to assume that St-Gobain would not stand on its rights. The purpose of the Statute was, said Lord Hoffmann: "precisely to avoid the need to decide which side was telling the truth about whether or not an oral promise had been made and exactly what had been promised." and "It is quite true . . that the system of civil procedure in 1677 was not very well adapted to discovering the truth. For one thing, the parties to the action were not competent witnesses. But the question of whether the Act should be preserved in its application to guarantees was considered in 1953 by the Law Reform Committee (First Report, Statute of Frauds and Section 4 of the Sale of Goods Act 1893 (Cmd 8809)) and the recommendation of a very strong committee was to keep it." Lord Bingham said that section 4 was enacted "to address a mischief facilitated, it seems, by the procedural deficiencies of the day . . the calling of perjured evidence to prove spurious agreements said to have been made orally. The solution applied to the five classes of contract specified in section 4 was to require, as a condition of enforceability, some written memorandum or note of the agreement signed by the party to be charged under the agreement or his authorised agent" Statute of Frauds 1677 4 1 Cites 1 Citers [ House of Lords ] - [ Bailii ] Â Aberavon and Port Talbot Rugby Football Club v Welsh Rugby Union Ltd [2003] EWCA Civ 584 9 Apr 2003 CA Contract [ Bailii ] Â Astea (Uk) Ltd v Time Group Ltd [2003] EWHC 725 (TCC); [2003] All ER (D) 212 9 Apr 2003 TCC His Honour Judge Richard Seymour QC Intellectual Property, Contract The question of whether a reasonable time has been exceeded in performance of a contract is "a broad consideration, with the benefit of hindsight, and viewed from the time at which one party contends that a reasonable time for performance has been exceeded, of what would, in all the circumstances which are by then known to have happened, have been a reasonable time for performance. That broad consideration is likely to include taking into account any estimate given by the performing party of how long it would take him to perform; whether that estimate has been exceeded and, if so, in what circumstances; whether the party for whose benefit the relevant obligation was to be performed needed to participate in the performance, actively, in the sense of collaborating in what was needed to be done, or passively, in the sense of being in a position to receive performance, or not at all; whether it was necessary for third parties to collaborate with the performing party in order to enable it to perform; and what exactly was the cause, or were the causes of the delay to performance. The list is not intended to be exhaustive. " 1 Cites 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â Embankment Place Hotels (Blackfriars) Ltd v Blackfriars Hotels Ltd and Another [2003] EWCA Civ 588 10 Apr 2003 CA Contract, Construction [ Bailii ] Â Tesco Stores Limited v Pook, Pook, Universal Projects (UK) Limited [2003] EWHC 823 (Ch); [2004] IRLR 618 14 Apr 2003 ChD The Honourable Mr Justice Peter Smith Contract, Torts - Other A trustee in breach of his duty has a duty to disclose that breach. It was alleged that the defendants, including a director of the claimant, had submitted false invoices to the claimants, and purchased property with the resulting profits. Held: Mr Pook owed a duty to disclose the bribes that he had taken. He was in breach of that duty. The agreement had an implied a term that the holder of the option should not be entitled to exercise it if he had committed "a serious breach of the contract". 1 Cites 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â Davis Turner and Co Ltd v Granville Oil and Chemicals Ltd [2003] EWCA Civ 570; [2003] 1All ER (Comm) 819; [2003] 2 Lloyd's Rep 356 15 Apr 2003 CA Lord Justice Potter Lord Justice Tuckey Mr Justice Hart Contract, Commercial The time bar provision, now found in cl. 28(B) of BIFA, satisfied the requirements of reasonableness under UCTA. Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â Hughes v Barratt Urban Construction (Scotland) Limited [2003] ScotCS 115 15 Apr 2003 SCS Leonna Dorrian QC Contract, Limitation Action for damages after a flat purchased as new was shown to have defects. [ Bailii ] Â Bride Hall Estates Ltd and another v St George North London Ltd Gazette, 22 June 2003 30 Apr 2003 ChD Mr John McDonnell QC Construction, Contract Land was sold with an overage clause, requiring further payments after deduction of incentives. The parties disputed whether car parking facilities given to the purchasers were incentives, or part of the consideration. Held: The clause itself was of little assistance. The parking spaces were included wihin the leases, and were part of what was sold. They were not to be deducted as incentives for the calculation. 1 Cites 1 Citers Â Burney v The London Mews Company Ltd [2003] EWCA Civ 766 7 May 2003 CA Waller LJ, Kay LJ, Lindsay J Agency, Contract The defendant sought to appeal judgment against him for his estate agent's commission. They had been appointed sole agents. A second firm obtained the particulars for their own retained clients, but then copied the particulars onto their own letterhead and advertised the property generally, finding the buyer. That buyer refused to buy through the second agents and approached the appellant direct. The appellant sold the house to the buyer telling the agent the house was withdrawn. Held: Whilst a prudent draftsman would have put the point beyond doubt by making an express provision on the issue commission was payable because a purchaser was introduced "by another agent during that period" within the terms of the relevant clause. "It would, as it seems to me, drive a coach and horses through the agreements which all estate agents make with vendors, if the mere fact that a would be purchaser. Who picked up the particulars from an estate agent's desk, but carried out all the necessary bargaining thereafter, had the effect and of depriving the estate agent of their commission. . . What Kaye & Co did was to utilise the particulars. The effect of utilising the particulars was to introduce a purchaser -- the very thing which the vendor hoped would happen by virtue of his employment of London Mews. London Mews did nothing wrong. They are not relying on something that they were not entitled to do, and in my view, the judge was right in the conclusion he came to that on the facts of this case, London Mews introduced Mr Cullinane to the transaction by use of their particulars, and I would uphold the judgment on that ground. 1 Cites 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â NIRU Battery Manufacturing Company and Another v Milestone Trading Ltd and others [2003] EWHC 1032 (Comm) 8 May 2003 ComC Moore-Bick J Contract There was a contract for the sale of lead ingots. The sale was supported by letters of credit but inaccurate certificates were issued to release payment. The parties sought now to amend the contributions in the light of the Royal Brompton Hospital case. Held: It was too late now to argue for any fraud. That was not the basis on which the case had been pursued at trial. The case did not fall within the case for recoupment under Moule, nor was any claim for restitution nor a contribution appropriate. SGS was entitled to recover from CAI the whole of the sum paid under the judgment. Moore-Bick J said: "I do not think that it is desirable to attempt to define the limits of good faith; it is a broad concept, the definition of which, in so far as it is capable of definition at all, will have to be worked out through the cases. In my view it is capable of embracing a failure to act in a commercially acceptable way and sharp practice of a kind that falls short of outright dishonesty as well as dishonesty itself. . . Where he knows that the payment he has received was made by mistake, the position is quite straightforward: he must return it. . . Greater difficulty may arise, however, in cases where the payee has grounds for believing that the payment may have been made by mistake, but cannot be sure. In such cases good faith may well dictate that an inquiry be made of the payer. The nature and extent of the inquiry called for will, of course, depend on the circumstances of the case, but I do not think that person who has, or thinks he was, good reason to believe that the payment was made by mistake will often be found to have acted in good faith if he pays the money away first making inquiries of the person from whom he received it." 1 Cites 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â Voice and Script International Ltd v Alghafar [2003] EWCA Civ 736 8 May 2003 CA Judge LJ Contract, Costs The court has a wide discretion whether to order the assessment of costs on an indemnity basis and the court of Appeal will rarely disturb the judge's order as to costs. Judge LJ said: "By treating the absence of allocation to track as conclusive in my judgment District Judge Jenkins misdirected himself. The omission may have meant that the small claims costs regime did not follow as a virtual automatic starting point, but it did not preclude the Court even from considering whether it would be reasonable to make an assessment consistent with the small cost regime, or for that matter to apply the regime for a claim which it should never have exceeded and never was anything more than a small claim. If that approach is not expressly stated in the Civil Procedure Rules, it follows from two essential principles. First, the discretionary nature of costs orders; and secondly, the overriding requirement of proportionality in civil litigation generally and also as an essential agreement for consideration when any question of costs arises. See Home Office v Lownds [2002] EWCA 365." Civil Procedure Rules 44.4.2 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â Merer v Fisher and Another [2003] EWCA Civ 747 13 May 2003 CA Lord Justice Potter, Lord Justice Mummery And Lady Justice Arden Land, Contract, Litigation Practice A right of pre-emption had misdescribed the property when it was registered. The land was transferred without regard to the right of pre-emption. It was found as a fact that no money passed for the transfer, and the claimants said the unregistered right of pre-emption was, under the Act, only void as against a purchaser for value. The defendant sought to challenge the finding as to consideration. Held: The question on appeal is whether the evidence on which the judge did not make findings, expressly or by implication, demonstrates that the judge's conclusion on the question as to the existence of the arrangement was plainly wrong. That was not established, and that part of the judgement stood. The claimant sought specific performance, the judge had refused it, but Sudbrook was to be distinguished and an order for specific performance granted. Land Charges Act 1925 4(6) 1 Cites [ Bailii ] Â Aci Worldwide (Emea) Limited v National Organisation Systems Technical and Trading Co Ltd [2003] EWHC 1163 (QB) 22 May 2003 QBD The Honourable Mr Justice Eady Agency, Contract [ Bailii ] Â Confetti Records (A Firm), Fundamental Records, Andrew Alcee v Warner Music UK Ltd (Trading As East West Records) [2003] EWCh 1274 (Ch); Times, 12 June 2003 23 May 2003 ChD The Honourable Mr Justice Lewison Contract, Media, Intellectual Property, Estoppel An agreement was made for the assignment of the copyright in a music track, but it remained 'subject to contract'. The assignor later sought to resile from the assignment. Held: It is standard practice in the music licensing business for a licensee and a licensor to enter into a deal memo followed by a long form contract, but the deal memo's and contract are not of a standard form. The circumstances are not so strong and exceptional as to displace the conventional meaning of the phrase "subject to contract". The burden was on the Defendant to establish any custom or usage within the industry to the effect that "subject to contract" does not bear the meaning it bears in normal legal usage. That burden was not discharged. The fact that a party to an agreement "subject to contract" acts on the faith of that agreement does not raise any estoppel as to the existence of a binding contract. In this case there had been representations and acts in reliance upon those expectations. An estoppel was created, and a contract concluded. There was accordingly no action for copyright infringement. The claimant also sought damages for the derogatory treatment of his work. That was claimable only if his reputation was damaged. The court had the faintly surreal experience of three gentlemen in horsehair wigs examining the meaning of such phrases as "mish mish man" and "shizzle (or sizzle) my nizzle", but there was no evidence of the author's reputation or damage to it. Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988 80 97(2) 1 Cites [ Bailii ] Â O R Humphries Partnership v Russell [2003] ScotSC 37 27 May 2003 ScSf Sheriff Principal Sir Stephen S.T. Young Contract [ Bailii ] Â Debenhams Retail Plc v Customs and Excise [2003] UKVAT V18169 3 Jun 2003 VDT Contract, VAT VDT CONSIDERATION – Value of supply – Retailer – Payment by credit or debit card – Appellant invites sales of goods and services at shelf price to customer – In-store notices and till slips state that customers may pay by card if 2.5% of price paid is payable to Appellant's subsidiary for card-handling services – Customer's card debt acquired by third party banks – Whether separate supply of exempt card-handling services by subsidiary to customer – Whether customer agrees with subsidiary for supply of services to customer – No – Whether value of Appellant's standard rated supply of goods or services reduced by 2.5% - No – Appeal dismissed SUPPLY – Exemption – Card-processing services – Appellant retailer invites sales of goods or services at shelf price to customers – Customers agree that 2.5% of price paid is payable to Appellant's subsidiary company for card-handling services – Customer's card debts to Appellant are acquired by third party banks – Whether, given that customer and subsidiary are in contractual relationship, subsidiary makes supply of card-handling services to customer – No TAX AVOIDANCE – Reduction of consideration for standard-rated supply – Sales of goods by Appellant – Appellant's wholly-owned subsidiary's contracts with card-paying customers provide that 2.5% of price paid will go to subsidiary for card-handling services – Subsidiary appoints Appellant as agent for all card-processing purposes – Customers' card debts acquired by third party banks – Scheme's purpose to secure that 2.5% paid to subsidiary is consideration for an exempt supply with result that 97.5% only of shelf price is consideration for Appellant's standard-rated supply – Whether purported supplies of card-handling services by subsidiary to be disregarded on Halifax principles as being neither economic activities nor supplies for VAT purposes – Yes – Whether conditions for abuse of rights doctrine (Emsland-Starke) satisfied - Yes 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â Edinburgh University v Eagle Star Insurance Company Ltd Times, 06 October 2003 4 Jun 2003 OHCS Lord Drummond Young Insurance, Contract The insurance policy excluded claims for 'damage caused by or consisting of or consequential losses arising directly from theft or attempted theft no involving breaking into or out of the buildings of the premises by forcible and violent means'. The thief did not use violence to enter the premises but did break down an internal door. Held: The insurance company could not rely upon the exclusion clause. The clause made no direct reference to external limits, and the context did not suggest that the insurance company's interpretation was commercially intended. It was intended to avoid liability for thefts by those with a right to enter the building. Â Jewson Limited v Leanne Teresa Boyhan As Personal Representative Of The Estate Of Thomas Michael Kelly [2003] EWCA Civ 1030 10 Jun 2003 CA Contract [ Bailii ] Â Sabena Technics SA v Singapore Airlines Ltd [2003] EWHC 1318 (Comm) 11 Jun 2003 ComC Contract [ Bailii ] Â MSAS Global Logistics Ltd v Power Packaging Inc Times, 25 June 2003 17 Jun 2003 ChD Davis J Contract The parties had exchanged contracts for the sale and purchase of a company's shares. The contract provided that a variation would only be effective if in writing. There was an oral agreement to allow time to complete. Held: The issue was whether in a telephone conversation, the contractual requirement to complete on that day had been waived. He had. An extension of time for completion was not as such a variation, because the contract already envisaged the possibility of an extension of time. Â Ali, Ali v Jhetam, Tan [2003] EWCA Civ 816 18 Jun 2003 CA Lord Justice Brooke Mr Justice Nelson Land, Contract Â Bim Kemi Ab v Blackburn Chemicals Ltd [2003] EWCA Civ 889 24 Jun 2003 CA Waller LJ Contract, Costs It had been argued by the claimant in written submissions (although not maintained orally) that an order for payment of pre-judgment interest on costs should never be made. As to an award of interest on costs:- "In any event in principle there seems no reason why the Court should not do so where a party has had to put up money paying its solicitors and been out of the use of that money in the meanwhile." It was ordered that the award of interest should run as from the date or dates of solicitors' invoices. The defendants had argued for a rate of interest of 6% per annum to reflect the fact that they would have had to pay 2% over base rate if they had borrowed the money from their bank. Waller LJ answered: "The question is whether the evidence in this case demonstrates that a rate greater than 1% above base rate should be applied. Evidence of what a bank might have charged if money had been borrowed is not we think sufficient. It is not clear to us what takes Blackburn outside the norm to which the 1% above base rate presumption applies. In our view the appropriate course in relation to these costs is to make an award of interest at 1% over base rate the interest to run from the date when the costs were paid." Civil Procedure Rules 44.3(6)(g) 1 Cites 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â Finsoft Holding Sa v Rowil Interim Management Bv and others [2003] EWHC 1433 (Comm) 25 Jun 2003 ComC Contract, Company [ Bailii ] Â Jarl Tra Ab and others v Convoys Ltd [2003] EWHC 1488 (Comm) 25 Jun 2003 ComC Contract [ Bailii ] Â Polley v Warner Goodman and Streat (A Firm) [2003] EWCA Civ 1013; [2003] PNLR 40 30 Jun 2003 CA Clarke LJ Professional Negligence, Contract, Legal Professions A cause of action in negligence is complete once the claimant has suffered loss as a result of the negligence, even if the existence of the loss (and indeed of the negligence) is not, and could not be, known to him, and even where that loss is much less than the loss which he ultimately suffers as a result of the negligence. The the issues identified in Hatton should be added "a sixth proposition, namely: damage often occurs before it can be crystallised, and difficulties of quantification do not prevent damage from being said to have occurred." 1 Cites 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â Vedatech Corporation v Crystal Decisions (Uk) Ltd and Another [2003] EWCA Civ 1066 3 Jul 2003 CA Contract [ Bailii ] Â Borkan General Trading Ltd v Monsoon Trading Ltd Times, 28 July 2003 8 Jul 2003 CA Peter Gibson, Clarke LJJ, Dyson J Equity, Contract A contract for a tug expressly provided a benefit for a third party. He now sought to claim benefit under it. Held: If, in the absence of a trust in his favour a third party for whose benefit a contract had expressly been made, could not take that benefit, then a trust would be implied. In this case it had been correct to imply actual authority to contract on behalf of the claimant. 1 Cites Â Shalson v Russo Times, 03 September 2003; Gazette, 18 September 2003 11 Jul 2003 ChD Rimer J Equity, Contract The claimant sought recovery of substantial sums he had advanced by way of loan, where the loan was induced by fraud. He sought to trace the funds into, inter alia, a motor yacht which it had been used to purchase. Held: The transaction was voidable, not immediately void. On discovery of the fraud, the claimant could put forward a proprietary claim to the money in order to trace them. The lender did not have the benefit of an immediate constructing trust of the money loaned before the contract was rescinded. It was the implied rescission of the loan contract which enabled the proprietary interest. In this case it was not appropriate to allow the claimant to consolidate an overdrawn current and a deposit account. Only those funds which put the account in credit could be taken into account. 1 Cites Â Coopers Payen Ltd and Another v Southampton Container Terminal Ltd and Another [2003] EWCA Civ 1223; [2004] 1 Lloyds Rep 331 11 Jul 2003 CA Lightman J, Schiemann, Clarke LJJ Contract, Litigation Practice The court considered the circumstances and practice where doubt was thrown on the evidence of a single joint expert. [ Bailii ] Â Vogon International Ltd v The Serious Fraud Office [2003] EWHC 1739 (TCC) 15 Jul 2003 TCC His Honour Judge Richard Seymour Q.C. Contract The claimant sought payment of invoices for work carried out in recovering data from computers. The contract required payment for investigation 'per database' The defendant argued that the term database should be taken to refer to what was intended at the time of the contract, and that the claimant was making an opportunistic attempt to overcharge. 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â Okta Crude Oil Refinery A D v Mamidoil-Jetoil Greek Petroleum Company S A and Another [2003] EWCA Civ 1031; [2003] 2 All ER (Comm) 640; [2003] 2 Lloyd's Rep 635 17 Jul 2003 CA Longmore, Arden LJJ Contract The parties had contracted to allow an exclusive right to deliver oil by tanker and to sell into Macedonia. The defendants claimed they were overborn, and claimed exemption under a force majeure clause. Held: The acts which had made the contracts apparently impossible to be complied with were themselves not entirely outside the control of the defendants. 1 Cites 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â Enterprise Plus Limited v Dr Bernard Wagenmann [2003] EWHC 1827 (QB) 23 Jul 2003 QBD The Honourable Mr Justice Eady Contract [ Bailii ] Â Compagnie Noga D'Importation Et D'Exportation Sa v Abacha and others [2003] EWCA Civ 1100 23 Jul 2003 CA Waller LJ, Tuckey LJ, Laws LJ Contract 1 Cites 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â VAI Industries (UK) Ltd v Bostock and Bramley and others [2003] EWCA Civ 1069 23 Jul 2003 CA Lord Justice Ward Mr Justice Newman Lord Justice Carnwath Contract, Limitation [ Bailii ] Â Enterprise Plus Ltd v Wagenmann [2002] EWHC 1827 (QB) 23 Jul 2003 QBD Contract [ Bailii ] Â Compensation Specialists Limited, Corry, Wright, Chapman v Compensation Claims Service Limited [2003] EWCA Civ 1108; Gazette, 02 October 2003 24 Jul 2003 CA Lord Justice Brooke Mr Justice Holman Lord Justice Jonathan Parker Contract, Commercial, Legal Professions The claimants acted as franchisees of the defendants, having agreed commission arrangements for the introduction of personal injury claimants. Following new rules, the sharing of such commissions became unlawful. The parties had failed to renegotiate a fee arrangement. The defendants appealed saying that the claimants had continuing duties to the lay clients. Held: The duty of client care continued during the life of the claims. The fee payable was a single fee for that entire service. The defendants would accordingly be able to deduct from outstanding commissions the sums paid out fulfilling the obligations undertaken by the claimants. Access to Justice Act 1999 [ Bailii ] Â Huyton Sa v Distribuidora Internacional De Productos Agricolas Sa De Cv [2003] EWCA Civ 1104 24 Jul 2003 CA Contract 1 Cites [ Bailii ] Â Weill v Mean Fiddler Holdings Ltd [2003] EWCA Civ 1058 25 Jul 2003 CA Contract [ Bailii ] Â P and S Platt Ltd v Crouch and Another [2003] EWCA Civ 1110; Times, 27 August 2003; [2004] 1 Pand CR 18 25 Jul 2003 CA Peter Gibson, Dyson, Longmore LJJ Contract, Land The claimant sought a declaration that certain easements had been included by implication in a conveyance of part of land to him. Held: Since the easements were capable of subsisting at law, and existed as quasi-easements at the time, and did not interfere to an unacceptable extent with the servient owner's enjoyment of his land, the judge's finding of what was in practice a question of fact would not be disturbed. Law of Property Act 1925 62 1 Cites 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â Jewson Limited v Boyhan as Personal Representative of the Estate of Thomas Michael Kelly [2003] EWCA Civ 1030 28 Jul 2003 CA Lord Justice Clarke Lord Justice Sedley Mr Justice Cresswell Contract The company appealed a finding that it was in breach of the 1979 Act. The deceased had bought boilers from the appellant. They were said not to be satisfactory, in that they were not as energy efficient as they had been described to be. Held: The purchaser himself had skills to assess what he bought and laid only partial reliance upon the seller's expertise. The boilers were fit for the purpose in the way in which the purchaser relied upon the seller's judgement. Equally, there was no breach of the term as to satisfactory quality implied by section 14(2). Sale of Goods Act 1979 13 14(2) 14(3) 1 Cites Â Dunblane Property Limited Anthony Richard Rand, v Motorcare Holdings Limited Motorcare Services Limited, [2003] EWCA Civ 1033 29 Jul 2003 CA Lord Justice Clarke Lord Justice Sedley The President Company, Contract The claimants sought damages for breach of a share sale agreement. The decision concerned the particular terms of this agreement. [ Bailii ] Â Devoran Joinery Company Ltd v Perkins [2003] EWCA Civ 1241 30 Jul 2003 CA Contract, Construction [ Bailii ] Â Parker v Harman International Industries Ltd [2003] EWHC 1850 (QB) 30 Jul 2003 QBD The Honourable Mr Justice Tugendhat Company, Contract [ Bailii ] Â Stephen Donald Architects Limited v King [2003] EWHC 1867 (TCC) 30 Jul 2003 TCC His Honour Judge Richard Seymour Q.C Construction, Contract [ Bailii ] Â Exxonmobil Sales and Supply Corporation v Texaco Ltd [2003] EWHC 1964 (Comm) 1 Aug 2003 ComC Contract [ Bailii ] Â Jordan Grand Prix Limited v Vodafone Group Plc [2003] EWHC 1956 (Comm); [2003] 2 Lloyds Rep. 874 4 Aug 2003 ComC The Honourable Mr Justice Langley Contract, Agency The claimant asserted that the defendant had agreed in the course of a telephone conversation, to provide sponsorship, and sought to enforce that agreement. There were considerable conflicts of evidence. Held: Evidence given on behalf of the claimant was inconsistent and incredible. No contract was made, the person dealing for Vodaphone did not have authority to make any final agreement, and this was known to the claimant. The claim failed entirely. 1 Cites 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â AMEC Mining v Scottish Coal Company [2003] ScotCS 223 6 Aug 2003 SCS Scotland, Construction, Contract The pursuers contracted to remove coal by opencast mining from the defender's land. They said the contract assumed the removal first of substantial peat depositys from the surface by a third party. They had to do that themselves at substantial cost. They said the defenders should have issued a variation to allow them to claim the costs. The defenders said it could have been claimed as a quantum meruit. Held: Quantum meruit was not normally claimable where there was a contract. There was a discretion to issue an instruction to vary and that had to be exercised reasonably. The pursuers averred that the defenders were under an obligation to ensure that their site manager operated the contract properly by issuing the instruction. No such term could be implied. 1 Cites [ Bailii ] Â Hearn and Another v Rugby Football Union and Another Times, 15 September 2003 26 Aug 2003 ChD Contract The New Brighton Football Club (Rugby Union) sought to challenge the non-relegation in league of the Nuneaton Club. Nuneaton had employed a player who was subject to immigration control requirements in particular the obligation to inform the Home Office if he changed employments. He had moved to Nuneaton without giving notification. If the Union had subtracted the appropriate number of points, Nuneaton would have been relegated and New Brighton promoted. Held: The relationship between clubs and the Union was contractual, and the court's role was supervisory. Points could only be dedcuted within the disciplinary code. That code only allowed action on a complaint properly notified. New Brighton had failed to notify their complaint within the necessary time limit. A club's entitlement to promotion became indefeasible at the end of a season. The need for finality in such arrangements overrode any jurisdiction of the court to the extent that such interference would be disproportionate. Â Commission of the European Communities v Hydrowatt SARL ECLI:EU:C:2003:461; [2003] EUECJ C-323/02 11 Sep 2003 ECJ Contract ECJ Arbitration clause - Non-performance of contract - Termination - Recovery of sums advanced - Interest. [ Bailii ] Â Portsmouth City Football Club v Sellar Properties (Portsmouth) Limited, Singer and Friedlander Properties Plc [2003] EWHC 2148 Ch 17 Sep 2003 ChD Mr Justice Lawrence Collins Contract Various contracts were entered into for the sale of land, with compensation being paid in certain circumstances. One contract required a calculation of consideration as a set figure less a sum to be calculated as the cost of acquiring land. The sum became payable but the parties were unable to agree the calculation. The land was acquired with other land but no apportionment agreed. Held: Against the factual background, the cost envisaged was not the cost of acquiring also additional easements. This was not a case where the method of calculation had broken down so as to allow the court to substitute its own. 1 Cites [ Bailii ] Â MCI Worldcom International Inc v Primus Telecommunications Inc [2003] EWHC 2182 (Comm) 25 Sep 2003 ComC The Honourable Mr Justice Colman Contract, Torts - Other The claimant sought judgment, and the defendant leave to amend its defence. The question was whether the proposed defence had any reasonable prospect of success. Held: The misrepresentation alleged was made by the claimant's in-house solicitor. However there was no evidence of any intent that she should say something misleading, and no right of rescission could arise. The counterclaim did not meet the appropriate test, and failed. Misrepresentation Act 1967 2(1) 1 Cites 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â Â Downtex v Flatley; CA 2-Oct-2003 - [2003] EWCA Civ 1282 Â Conocophillips Petroleum Company UK Limited (Formerly Phillips Petroleum Company United Kingdom Limited) v Snamprogetti Limited, Snamprogetti International S A [2003] EWHC 223 (TCC) 2 Oct 2003 QBD Judge Richard Havery QC Contract [ Bailii ] Â Tanwar Enterprises Pty Ltd v Cauchi (2003) 217 CLR 315; [2003] HCA 57 7 Oct 2003 Gleeson CJ, McHugh, Gummow, Kirby, Hayne, Callinan, Heydon JJ Commonwealth, Land, Contract High Court of Australia - Vendor and purchaser - Contracts for sale of land - Default by purchaser - Notice of termination - Supplemental deed requiring completion by stipulated date - Time of essence - Default by purchaser - Notice of termination - Purchase price available following day - Specific performance - Whether unconscientious for vendors to exercise right of termination - Whether relief on the ground of "accident" available in face of essential time stipulation. Equity - Relief against forfeiture - Contracts for sale of land - Default by purchaser - Whether unconscientious for vendors to exercise right of termination - Whether default occasioned by "accident" - Whether relief on the ground of "accident" available in face of essential time stipulation. 1 Citers [ Austlii ] Â Fal Oil Co Limited, Credit Agricole Indosuez (Suisse) S A v Petronas Trading Corporation Sdn Bhd [2003] EWHC 2225 (Comm) 10 Oct 2003 QBD The Honourable Mr Justice Morison Transport, Contract [ Bailii ] Â Gadhok v Shamji [2003] EWCA Civ 1928 10 Oct 2003 CA Contract [ Bailii ] Â Charman v New Cap Reinsurance Corporation Ltd [2003] EWCA Civ 1372 16 Oct 2003 CA Mr Justice Holman Lord Justice Potter Lord Justice Rix Insurance, Contract [ Bailii ] Â Amiri Flight Authority v BAE Systems Plc [2003] EWCA Civ 1447 17 Oct 2003 CA Lord Justice Potter, Lord Justice Mance And Lord Justice Rix International, Contract The appellant had contracted to purchase maintenance from the defendant of aircraft it had also purchased from them. They sought damages for negligence, saying the defendants had failed to prevent a known risk of corrosion. The defendants argued that its contract excluded liability, and under the Act, that clause was not subjected to a test of reasonableness, being an international supply contract. Held: The exclusion clause was clear and unambiguous. The Act required the contract to govern the supply of goods delivered abroad. The scheme of section 26 leads to narrow or even arbitrary distinctions. The history of the legislation did not suggest that the effect of the simple words should be departed from. The contract was not a contract for the delivery of goods, and so was not exempt. Appeal allowed. Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977 26 1 Cites [ Bailii ] Â Marine Oil Traders v Vitol Sa and Another [2003] EWHC 3555 (QB) 21 Oct 2003 QBD Tomlinson J Contract [ Bailii ] Â Base Metal Trading Ltd v Shamurin [2003] EWHC 2419 (Comm) 22 Oct 2003 ComC Contract 1 Cites 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â Butts Park Ventures (Coventry) Limited v Bryant Homes Central Limited [2003] EWHC 2487 Ch 29 Oct 2003 ChD The Vice-Chancellor Land, Contract 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â Iveco Finance Ltd v Man Truck and Bus UK Ltd [2003] EWCA Civ 1613 30 Oct 2003 CA Contract [ Bailii ] Â Laminates Acquisition Co v BTR Australia Ltd [2003] EWHC 2540 (Comm) 31 Oct 2003 ComC Company, Contract The claimant sought damages for breach of a company share sale agreement. The seller had given a warranty that it was not involved in any undisclosed litigation. An anti-trust investigation had been begun in the US. Held: In this case the seller could not demonstrate that it had complied with its own obligations under the warranties, and was therefore precluded from itself relying upon other provisions within the contract. 1 Cites 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â Nisshin Shipping Co Ltd v Cleaves and Company Ltd and others [2003] EWHC 2602 (Comm) 7 Nov 2003 QBD The Honourable Mr Justice Colman Contract, Transport, Arbitration One party sought a declaration that arbitrators should have no jurisdiction to determine claims for commission said to be due to the Respondent chartering brokers. Held: Because he has in effect become a statutory assignee of the promisee’s right of action against the promisor and because, by reason of the underlying policy of section 1(4), he is confined to the means of enforcement provided by the contract to the promisee, namely arbitration. He is to be treated as standing in the shoes of that promisee for the purpose only of the enforcement of the substantive term. In this case, the scope of the disputes covered by the arbitration agreements was wide enough to embrace a dispute between owners and charterers about payment of the brokers’ commission, and they fell to be resolved by arbitration. Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 1(4) - Arbitration Act 1996 67 1 Cites [ Bailii ] Â Dhl Air Ltd v Wells [2003] EWCA Civ 1743 7 Nov 2003 CA Employment, Contract [ Bailii ] Â Direct Travel Insurance v McGeown [2003] EWCA Civ 1606; [2004] 1 All ER (Comm) 609 12 Nov 2003 CA Auld, Mummery, Keene LJJ Personal Injury, Contract The contra proferentem rule is to be invoked only in cases of genuine doubt or ambiguity. Auld LJ said: "A court should be wary of starting its analysis by finding an ambiguity by reference to the words in question looked at on their own. And it should not, in any event, on such a finding, move straight to the contra proferentem rule without first looking at the context and, where appropriate, permissible aids to identifying the purpose of the commercial document of which the words form part. Too early recourse to the contra proferentem rule runs the danger of 'creating' an ambiguity where there is none". 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â Pickfords Ltd v Celestica Ltd [2003] EWCA Civ 1741 19 Nov 2003 CA Arden, Dyson LJJ Contract The claimant executed works for the defendant and claimed payment. There was a dispute about which documents made up the contract. Held: The defendant had thought he accepted an offer which had already been withdrawn. The defendant was due to pay the sum shown on the first offer calculated by rate as described rather than the fixed (and much larger) sum in the second fax. [ Bailii ] Â Shogun Finance Limited v Hudson [2003] UKHL 62; Times, 20 November 2003; [2003] 3 WLR 1627; [2004] 1 LLR 532; [2004] 1 All ER 215; [2004] 1 AC 1101; [2004] 1 Lloyd's Rep 532; [2004] RTR 12; [2004] PIQR P20; [2004] ELR 11; [2004] 1 All ER (Comm) 332 19 Nov 2003 HL Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead, Lord Hobhouse of Woodborough, Lord Millett, Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers, Lord Walker of Gestingthorpe Contract, Torts - Other, Consumer A purchaser used a stolen driving licence to obtain credit for and purchase a car. He then purported to sell it to the respondent, and then disappeared. The finance company sought return of the car. Held: (Lords Nicholls and Millett dissenting) The rogue had not acquired a title, and could not therefore pass one. The terms of the contract were clear. Other circumstances were not available to construe a clear written contract. The question was whether the rogue was a debtor under the agreement. He was not, and could not pass title. Hire Purchase Act 1964 27(1) 27(2) 29(4) 1 Cites 1 Citers [ House of Lords ] - [ Bailii ] Â Â Colen and Another v Cebrian (UK) Limited; CA 20-Nov-2003 - [2003] EWCA Civ 1676; Times, 27 November 2003; Gazette, 15 January 2004; [2004] ICR 568 Â Â Cine Bes Filmcilik Ve Yapimcilik and Another v United International Pictures and Others; CA 21-Nov-2003 - [2003] EWCA Civ 1669; [2004] 1 CLC 401 Â Tekron Resources Ltd v Guinea Investment Company Ltd [2003] EWHC 2577 (QB); [2004] 2 Lloyd's Rep 26 24 Nov 2003 QBD Contract [ Bailii ] Â Paragon Finance Plc (Formerly the National Home Loans Corporation Plc) v Pender and Pender [2003] EWHC 2834 (Ch) 25 Nov 2003 ChD The Honourable Mr Justice Peter Smith Consumer, Contract, Land, Registered Land Section 114 of the 1925 Act has no application to Registered Land. It provides for a transfer "unless a contrary intention is expressed" in the mortgage. Thus if section 114 applies, all depends upon the true construction of the mortgage. The power under the Civil Procedure Rules to revoke an earlier order included a power to revoke an order made under the earlier rules. Peter Smith J: "In my opinion, section 114 LPA 1925, either has no impact in the case of a transfer of a registered charge under registered land or its effects are subject to the need for the transferee to become registered proprietor under the LRA regime." and "In my judgment although s. 114 LPA does not say so it is not intended to apply to transfers of registered charges under the LRA 1925. The regime for transferring those charges is the statutory regime to which I have made reference above." "That does not mean that section 114 will have no effect." Law of Property Act 1925 114 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â Sunrule Ltd v Avinue Ltd [2003] EWCA Civ 1942; Gazette, 15 January 2004 26 Nov 2003 CA Contract, Civil Procedure Rules, Company The defendant company sought to appear by a lay representative in a small claims track case in a county court. The court did not allow that, and the only representative was a director with limited English. The company appealed. Held: The normal rule as to representation of companies did not apply in cases allocated in this way. A corporate party was entitled, as of right, to be represented by a lay representative at the trial of a small claim in a county court, whether or not the representative was an officer or an employee of the company. Civil Procedure Rules 27.2(1)(h) [ Bailii ] Â Cel Group Ltd v Nedlloyd Lines UK Ltd and Another [2003] EWCA Civ 1716 26 Nov 2003 CA Lady Justice Hale Lord Justice Waller Lord Justice Carnwath Contract, Commercial 1 Cites 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â Pratt Contractors Limited v Transit New Zealand [2003] UKPC 83 1 Dec 2003 PC Lord Nicholls of Birkenhead, Lord Slynn of Hadley, Lord Hoffmann, Lord Hope of Craighead, Lord Walker of Gestingthorpe Commonwealth, Contract PC (New Zealand) The claimant sought damages arising from the defendant's management of a bidding process. It had submitted the lowest tender, but that had been rejected. The tender document allowed rejection of the lowest bid. Held: The findings of fact justify a conclusion that there was a breach of the express or implied terms of the preliminary procedural contract at either of the tender rounds. They also agree with the Court of Appeal that even if there was such a breach in the first round, it would have had no causative effect on Pratt's failure to obtain the contract. [ PC ] - [ Bailii ] Â Royal Bank of Canada v Cooperative Centrale Raiffeisen-Boorenleenbank Binding Authority [2003] EWHC 2913 (Comm) 2 Dec 2003 ComC Andrew Smith J Banking, Contract 1 Citers [ Bailii ] - [ Bailii ] Â Rolls-Royce Power Engineering Plc and Another v Ricardo Consulting Engineers Ltd [2003] EWHC 2871 (TCC) 2 Dec 2003 TCC Contract 1 Cites [ Bailii ] Â Atlantic Computing Services (UK) Limited v Burns Express Freight Limited [2003] ScotCS 297; Times, 29 January 2004 2 Dec 2003 IHCS Lord Justice Clerk And Lord Johnston And Lord Osborne Contract A contract was made for the delivery of goods from England to Scotland. The lorry and goods were damaged by fire on the M25. The defenders appealed an order that the 1856 Act applied to allow recovery in Scotland. Held: The Act precluded application outside Scotland. It was not appropriate to apply the Act by virtue of the fact that the carrier was Scottish. Mercantile Law Amendment (Scotland) Act 1856 17 - Private International Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1995 [ Bailii ] Â Hartley v Hartley [2003] EWCA Civ 1688 3 Dec 2003 CA Lord Justice Mance Lord Justice Mummery Lord Justice Simon Brown Company, Contract Appeal from judgment against the defendant in respect of five loans made to different companies. [ Bailii ] Â Panos Eliades, Panix Promotions Ltd, Panix of the Us Inc v Lennox Lewis Times, 10 December 2003; [2003] EWCA Civ 1758; Gazette, 22 January 2004 8 Dec 2003 CA Lord Justice Potter Lord Justice Jacob Lord Justice Carnwath Contract, Torts - Other The claimant had obtained an award of damges in the US, and had had orders made for its enforcement here. The appellants contended that the award, containing an element of 'multiplied damages' offended the rules which would allow its enforcement here. Held: Since the original judgment the US court had restated its decision and clarified the elements of one single sum, and one part in respect of treble damages. The proper view of the rule was that it was an exception to the general desire to give effect to foreign judgments. The US had not signed any treaty for the reciprocal enforcement of judgments, and must therefore rely upon the common law. The award should be enforceable save to the extent where enforcement was proscribed. An English court could examine that judgment and enforce that part of it which did not infringe the rule. [ Bailii ] Â Â Erich Gasser GmbH v MISAT Srl; ECJ 9-Dec-2003 - C-116/02; Times, 12 December 2003; [2004] 1 Lloyd's Rep 222; [2003] EUECJ C-116/02; [2005] 1 QB 1; [2003] ECR I-14693; [2003] ECR 14; [2004] 3 WLR 1070; [2004] ILPr 7; [2005] All ER (EC) 517; [2005] 1 All ER (Comm) 538 Â Amalgamated Roofing and Building Company v Wilkie and others [2003] ScotCS 309; 2004 SCLR 267 10 Dec 2003 SCS Contract, Land The pursuers sought reduction both of a disposition granted by the first defender to the second defender and of a standard security granted by the first defender to the third defenders. [ Bailii ] Â Thew v Cole; King v Daltray Times, 15 January 2004; [2003] EWCA Civ 1828 16 Dec 2003 CA Tuckey, Jonathan Parker, LJJ, Evans Lombe J Consumer, Contract Issues arose as to whether car hire agreements were exempt from regulation under the Act. They provided that payment was to be made in 12 months 'from the start of the agreement'. Held: The first question was whether the time by which the hirer was required to make payment coincided with the end of the period of deferment or followed it. There were not two times, but just one. As the period expired the payment became due. Was this 'within a period not exceeding twelve months'? Yes, the period was defined as 'not more than twelve months' The agreement was ambiguous and was to be construed against the hire company. Consumer Credit Act 1974 1 Cites [ Bailii ] Â Dinkha Latchint/A Dinkha Latchin Associates v General Mediterranean Holdings Sa, Nadhmi S Auchi [2003] EWCA Civ 1786 16 Dec 2003 CA Lord Justice Brooke Lord Justice Sedley Lord Justice Jacob Contract [ Bailii ] Â Masons (A Firm) v Wd King Ltd and Another [2003] EWHC 3124 (TCC) 17 Dec 2003 TCC J Humphrey Lloyd QC Contract [ Bailii ] Â Raymond Anthony Morris, Charles Alan Morris v Glendore Investments Ltd [2003] EWHC 3091 (Ch) 18 Dec 2003 ChD Mr Justice Collins Land, Contract [ Bailii ] Â Morin v Bonhams and Brooks Limited Bonhams and Brooks S A M [2003] EWCA Civ 1802; [2004] 1 All ER (Comm) 880; [2004] 1 Lloyd's Rep 702; [2004] ILPr 24 18 Dec 2003 CA Lord Justice Keene Lord Justice Mance Contract, Jurisdiction The claimant had bought a vintage Ferrari motor car through the defendant auctioneers in Monaco but sought rescission after it appeared that the odometer had been altered. The auction conditions purported to exclude any description of the car. He appealed against refusal of a request for leave to serve the defendant outside the jurisdiction. Mance LJ said: "As to English law, the judge also concluded, obiter, that Mr Morin had a reasonable prospect of showing that [B&B Monaco] owed him and were in breach of a duty of care, despite cll 3 and 27 of the conditions of sale. He distinguished statements of Morison J in De Balkany v Christie Manson & Woods Ltd (1997) 16 Tr LR 163 as obiter and as concerned with differently worded conditions. The present conditions are at pains to exclude any warranty or guarantee, and to refer to catalogue statements as matters of 'opinion'. But cl 3 is prefaced by the words 'Whilst every effort is made to ensure the accuracy of the description of each Lot in any Catalogue' and cl 27 says that the description and information in the catalogue 'are given for guidance'. It is a usual implication in relation to any expression of opinion by a professional person that due diligence has been exercised in preparing and expressing the opinion, and the opening words of cl 3 are entirely consistent with this". Private International Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1995 1 Cites 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â Rhodia Chirex Limited v Laker Vent Engineering Limited [2003] EWCA Civ 1859 18 Dec 2003 CA Lord Justice Auld Lady Justice Hale Lord Justice Dyson Construction, Contract [ Bailii ] Â Parshotam Mahtani, Sterling Bureau De Change Ltd v Keith Billington [2003] EWHC 3127 [QB] 18 Dec 2003 QBD The Honourable Mr Justice Eady Contract [ Bailii ] Â Euro Cellular (Distribution) Plc v (I) Danzas Ltd T/A Danzas AEI Intercontinental, Danzas AEI (UK) Ltd T/A Danzas AEI Intercontinental [2003] EWHC 3161 (Comm) 19 Dec 2003 ComC Contract [ Bailii ] Â Sutton v Mishcon de Reya (a Firm) and Another Times, 28 January 2004 19 Dec 2003 ChD Hart J Professional Negligence, Contract Two men entering into a relationship of 'master and slave' signed a document entitled a 'statement of trust' intended to regulate the property arrangements as between themselves. They later signed a cohabitation agreement. They were advised that it was unenforceable, and were advised to seek independent advice. Property was conveyed into one name. They later claimed the defendant was negligent in referring to the statement of trust which was likely to be void as contrary to public policy. Held: The court should distinguish between a property contract between two people whose sexual relationship brought them to live together, and a property relationship springing from the sexual relationship. A contract between consenting adults would not be avoided under public policy unless it was meretritious or for prostitution. The statement of trust was an attempt to express the sexual relationship in a property contract. Neither law firm was negligent. Even had the statement of trust been void, it would have had to have been referred to. Â Co-Operative Group (CWS) Ltd v International Computers Ltd [2003] EWCA Civ 1955; Times, 19 January 2004 19 Dec 2003 CA Torts - Other, Contract The judge at first instance had expressed the opinion that the claimant had little prospect of succeeding. Held: The statement gave the impression that he had lost the ability to hear the ability to hear the case impartially. 1 Cites 1 Citers [ Bailii ] Â Mainland v Mainland Salmon Ltd [2003] ScotCS 320 19 Dec 2003 SCS Contract [ Bailii ] Â Â Lalji v Post Office Limited; CA 19-Dec-2003 - [2003] EWCA Civ 1873 Â Giad Hamdo Pipes Complex Company Limited v Wilson Byard Limited (In Receivership) MacLennan for Interdict and Interdict Ad Interim [2003] ScotCS 348 30 Dec 2003 OHCS Lord Brodie Contract 1 Cites [ Bailii ] Â
		Copyright 2014 David Swarbrick, 10 Halifax Road, Brighouse, West Yorkshire HD6 2AG.

swarb.co.uk - law index

Contract - From: 2003 To: 2003