The defendant appealed a finding in which the judge had inferred against it serious imputations where neither party had made such an allegation, and the defendant had not been given forewarning of such a finding.
Held: The judge had correctly construed the contract, but had been wrong to make findings against the defendant which were otiose and not part of the claimant’s case.
May LJ said: ‘It is . . elementary common fairness that neither parties to litigation, their counsel, nor judges should make serious imputations or findings in any litigation when the person against whom such imputations or findings are made have not been given a proper opportunity of dealing with the imputations and defending themselves.’
Judges:
Lord Phillips Of Worth Matravers Mr, Lord Justice May Lord Justice Jonathan Parker
Citations:
[2004] EWCA Civ 104, Times 26-Feb-2004
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Citing:
Appeal from – Vogon International Ltd v The Serious Fraud Office TCC 15-Jul-2003
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 . .
Cited by:
Cited – London Borough of Haringey v Hines CA 20-Oct-2010
The authority sought rescission of a lease granted to the defendant under the right to buy scheme, saying that she had misrepresented her occupation when applying. The tenant replied that no adequate evidence had been brought that she was not a . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Contract
Updated: 09 June 2022; Ref: scu.193638