Manchester City Football Club Plc v Royle: CA 8 Mar 2005

The club had dismissed its manager, paying the compensation it thought due. The claimant disagreed and sued for more. The compensation varied according to the division in which the club was playing at the time of the dismissal. At the end of the season the club was relegated. The club calculated the sum due on the basis that the club was in the lower division, the manager on the basis that the club was still in the Premier League. The rules said that the season ended on completion of the last game. The relegation involved the surrender of a share in the Premier league. At the time of the dismissal the company share had not been transferred.
Held: The clause intended to reproduce the effect at common law, which would have looked forward to future earnings. The league rules also distinguished between relegation and the share transfer: ‘Whether the Club was about to be or had just been relegated, it was ineluctably going to play in the First Division in the next season, and the manager would have received the lower rate of pay. That is what he lost by his dismissal. Seen in that way, the precise date on which the Club moves from the Premier Division to the First Division becomes of less significance.’ The club’s appeal was allowed.
Lord Justice Sedley, Lady Justice Smith, And Lord Justice Gage
[2005] EWCA Civ 195, Times 14-Mar-2005
Bailii
England and Wales
Citing:
CitedInvestors Compensation Scheme Ltd v West Bromwich Building Society HL 19-Jun-1997
Account taken of circumstances wihout ambiguity
The respondent gave advice on home income plans. The individual claimants had assigned their initial claims to the scheme, but later sought also to have their mortgages in favour of the respondent set aside.
Held: Investors having once . .

These lists may be incomplete.
Updated: 14 April 2021; Ref: scu.223271