Compact Contract

A brief look at topical issues in contract

23 October 2019 - Jason Rix

In a recent decision, upholding a refusal to grant summary judgment, the Court of Appeal held that an entire agreement clause and an exemption clause were ineffective to prevent a Quincecare duty arising or to exclude liability under that duty. In simplified form, a Quincecare duty means that a bank must not make a payment › Read More

05 July 2019 - Laurence Ridgway

In Classic Maritime v Limbungan, the Court of Appeal overturned the High Court and awarded substantial damages for breach even though performance ultimately would not have been possible. Limbungan failed to deliver iron ore to Classic Maritime when a flood shut down the mine producing the ore. The High Court, had held that to rely on › Read More

16 October 2018 - Leah Fisher

In Arcadis v AMEC, the Court of Appeal held that a liability cap had been incorporated into a letter of instruction. AMEC, a specialist concrete contractor, employed Arcadis, an engineering outfit, to help design two construction projects: the Wellcome Building and Castlepoint car park. A detailed Protocol Agreement was exchanged but never finalised. Work was › Read More

26 June 2018 - Crawford Jamieson

In Goodlife v Hall Protection, the Court of Appeal held an all liability exclusion clause was neither onerous nor unreasonable. Goodlife bought a fire suppression system from Hall Fire. Despite the purchase, Goodlife suffered a devastating fire. Hall Fire’s standard conditions excluded all liability whatsoever for failure of the safety equipment. Goodlife argued that it › Read More

22 June 2018 - Jon Turnbull

When commercial parties contract, they usually want to restrict their potential liabilities to the four corners of the document. The law sometimes has other ideas. Misrepresentation is a classic example. Liability for misrepresentation can be excluded by commonly found “non-reliance” clauses (often found within an entire agreement clause). These clauses set up a contractual estoppel; › Read More

21 May 2018 - Sophie Walker

In Carney v Rothschild, the High Court considered the efficacy of “basis clauses” in the context of a financial mis-selling claim in which it was alleged that an unfair relationship under the Consumer Credit Act 1974 had arisen. The claimants, four British expats living in Spain, had borrowed funds from the bank, secured against their › Read More

27 February 2018 - Jason Rix

In Nesbit Law v Acasta Insurance the Court of Appeal held that an insurer could not rely on an exclusion clause in order to avoid paying out under its policy. The claimant personal injury solicitors were members of a funding scheme run by the defendant insurer and a bank. On joining the scheme the solicitors’ › Read More

01 February 2018 - Jason Rix

In Interactive E-Solutions v O3B, the Court of Appeal has, yet again, held that a widely drafted exclusion clause represented the allocation of risk between the parties. A dispute arose when Interactive refused to pay service fees due to O3B under a contract, and O3B purported to terminate the contract. Interactive brought an action for › Read More

15 December 2017 - Jason Rix

Last month, a group of us (Erwan Poisson, Joost Everaert, Julie Metois, James Freeman and I) gave some training on limiting liability in commercial contracts. So far so unsurprising. The sting in tail was that we were covering the topic under Belgian, French and English law. This served to highlight some legal and cultural differences › Read More

13 September 2017 - Emily Davies

In Royal Devon and Exeter NHS Foundation Trust v ATOS IT Services, the court found that (i) an ambiguous limitation of liability clause was enforceable and (ii) damages for wasted expenditure were distinguishable from damages for loss of profits. The Trust engaged ATOS to provide information management services. Unhappy with the performance of the system, › Read More