Compact Contract

A brief look at topical issues in contract

17 August 2018 Victoria Williams

In Rock v MWB, the Supreme Court declined to deal with consideration. In Simantob v Shavleyan, the High Court had to grapple with it. The parties were art dealers and had settled claims relating to a dispute over the sale of antique Islamic art. Mr Shavleyan agreed to pay Mr Simantob USD 1.5m in full › Read More

17 August 2018 Elizabeth Staves

The High Court in Standish v RBS  held that an alleged overarching agreement was unnecessary and therefore could not arise by implication. There was no breach of an implied duty of good faith and the claim was struck out as it was bound to fail. Standish were shareholders in a company which suffered financial difficulties. › Read More

16 August 2018 Georgina Thomson

When NIVE sued Rembrandt for breach of its contract for the supply of egg products, Rembrandt claimed it had been induced to enter the contract by NIVE’s fraudulent misrepresentation. The court agreed that the representation had been made, but had it induced Rembrandt to enter the contract (NIVE v Rembrant)? In recent years the test › Read More

13 August 2018 Becky Gardner

In Minera Las Bambas v Glencore, the court considered the meaning of the word “payable” in a tax indemnity. In doing so it emphasised the importance of the documentary context to interpretation and attached less weight to the factual matrix where the contract had been drafted by experienced lawyers. The parties entered into a share purchase › Read More

10 August 2018 Christopher Cobb

Addressing the copyright in computer software, the High Court saw past the tax advantageous labels applied to a contractual relationship to decide ownership by virtue of an employee/employer relationship or, alternatively, an implied assignment (Sprint Electric v Buyer’s Dream). This post focuses on the first of several contractual agreements in dispute between the parties. Sprint › Read More

09 August 2018 Jon Turnbull

Back in 2012 the FSA (now FCA) launched an investigation into mis-selling of interest rate hedging products. A number of banks agreed with the FCA to conduct a pro-active redress exercise. This required the banks to review their sales to non-sophisticated customers and provide redress where appropriate. Some customers – unsatisfied with the redress on › Read More

01 August 2018 Finnuala Meaden-Torbitt

In PM Law v Motorplus, the Court of Appeal has found that despite the use of the word “shall” in a contract, no obligation was imposed by it. PM Law, a law firm, and Motorplus, an insurance intermediary, entered into a contract in 2007 for the referral of personal injury claims. The parties had already › Read More

31 July 2018 Crawford Jamieson

The High Court has held reasonable endeavours clauses require a detailed factual investigation, making them unsuitable for summary judgment (Insurance Medical Reporting v Your Lawyers Ltd). Insurance Medical Reporting provided medical reports to a law firm called Your Lawyers Ltd which specialises in personal injury claims. The parties had entered into an a credit agreement › Read More

26 July 2018 Adrian Dykes

In Holland and Barrett v GNIC, the Court of Appeal considered the interplay between the terms of a trade mark licence relating to exclusivity, termination and revocation of the licensed marks for non-use. The licence was part of a business that Holland and Barrett bought that sold nutritional supplements under the GNC brand. The licence used › Read More

25 July 2018 Oliver Rule

In Al Jaber v Al Ibrahim, the Court of Appeal held that interest should not be implied into an oral loan agreement. Back in 2001, the claimant lent USD 30m to the defendants to finance an Arabic 24 hour news channel. The parties never mentioned interest and the arrangement was not documented, and for a › Read More