The defendants appealed an injunction which prevented them soliciting business from any customer of the claimant for one year, granted pursuant to a restrictive covenant contained in a franchise agreement.
Held: The injunction was discharged. The claimant had deducted more than was due to it during the franchise, and was in breach. This amounted to a repudiation. The claimant had drafted the agreement and must be intended to achieve the result of the words used.
Judges:
Keens LJ, Wall LJ, Wilson LJ
Citations:
[2006] EWCA Civ 1209
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Cited – General Billposting Company Limited v Atkinson HL 1908
The employers had dismissed their employee manager ‘in deliberate disregard of the terms of the contract’ in such a way as ‘to evince an intention no longer to be bound by the contract.’ The manager had successfully brought an action for wrongful . .
Cited – Investors 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 . .
Cited – Inland Revenue Commissioners v Raphael and Ezra HL 1935
Parties to a contract should be presumed to have intended what in fact they have said.
The function of the recitals in a lease is to narrate the history leading up to the making of the lease.
Lord Wright said: ‘ . . the principle of the . .
Cited – Esso Petroleum Company Ltd v Addison and others ComC 15-Jul-2002
The applicants were retailers of the products of the defendant. The supply agreement allowed the defendant to alter the pricing structures. They complained.
Held: The agreements were lawful and did allow Esso to alter the prices in the way . .
Cited – Paperlight Limited v Swinton Group Limited 1996
The court identified principles of construction for a franchise agreement, including that the franchisor’s covenant not to derogate from his grant amounted in this context to ‘really no more than an application of the contra proferentem rule’. . .
Cited – Molton Builders Ltd v City of Westminster London Borough Council CA 1975
Lord Denning MR said: ‘The doctrine of derogation from grant is usually applied to sales or leases of land, but it is of wider application. It is a general principle of law that, if a man agrees to confer a particular benefit on another, he must not . .
Cited – British Leyland Motor Corporation Ltd v Armstrong Patents Co Ltd HL 1986
The claimant’s product was made from drawings. The drawings were protected as copyright artistic works. They were reproduced in a three dimensional form by the claimant’s own products. Someone who copied the claimant’s products indirectly copied the . .
Cited – Johnston and Sons Ltd v Holland CA 1988
The test for whether there had been a derogation from a grant was whether there had been a substantial deprivation of benefit, rather than a total deprivation. The principle of non-derogation from grant is ‘not based on some ancient technicality of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Contract
Updated: 26 November 2022; Ref: scu.244761