Implied terms

Clearing the high-jump: implied term makes it over the M&S v BNP Paribas

Briony Langley-Miles

In Zedra Trust Company v The Hut Group, the High Court found that a term could be implied into a share purchase agreement in relation to the provision of an auditors’ report. Zedra had sold the entire issued capital of Cend to The Hut Group. The share purchase agreement contained a mechanism for the seller Read More

No Comments

Termination based on company being struck off not affected by restoration

Samuel Webb

In Bridgehouse v BAE Systems, a termination notice based on a company being dissolved remained effective despite the company being restored to the register. BAE agreed to procure the sale, by one of its subsidiaries, of two airfields for GBP 93m to Bridgehouse. BAE was able to terminate the agreement if Bridgehouse was struck off Read More

No Comments

Express or implied? High Court rejects “market practice” term

Godwin Tan

In CFH Clearing v Merrill Lynch, the High Court held that there was neither an express nor an implied term requiring Merrill Lynch to act in accordance with market practice and reprice or cancel foreign exchange spot trades that were entered into at a time of market disruption. In 2015, CFH Clearing entered into FX Read More

No Comments

You’ve got mail: the High Court puts a stamp on good faith and relational contracts

Jason Rix

In Bates v Post Office the court has implied a duty to act in good faith into a contract on the basis of it being relational. This dispute is between 550 claimants, most sub-postmasters, and the Post Office. It concerns Horizon, an electronic point of sale and accounting system. The claimants say defects in Horizon Read More

One comment

Estate agent’s commission: Supreme Court on binding agreements and implied terms

Jason Rix

This morning the Supreme Court found, overturning the Court of Appeal, that a short telephone call was enough to create a binding agreement between an estate agent and his client, even though the trigger event for the commission had not been specified (Wells v Devani). There were very different accounts of the crucial phone call. Read More

No Comments

The High Court’s dance with an implied term of natural justice

Bethany Gregory

In Dymoke v Association for Dance Movement Psychotherapy, the court held that an organisation breached an implied duty of procedural fairness by terminating an individual’s membership without informing them of the substance of criticisms made against them or providing any opportunity to respond or to address the potential termination. Dymoke taught an MA course which Read More

No Comments

Crimea river: Russia and Ukraine in bond case

Jason Rix

In Ukraine v Law Debenture, the Court of Appeal refused to imply terms into a trust deed and an agency agreement that Ukraine’s obligation to repay some Eurobonds wouldn’t arise if Russia, the sole noteholder, hindered repayment. Law Debenture (at the direction of Russia) sought summary judgment against Ukraine for non-repayment of Eurobonds. Part of Ukraine’s Read More

No Comments

The copyright and wrongs of tax evasion and implied contractual terms

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

No Comments

A case of no interest whatsoever?

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

No Comments

Implied terms: hindsight not relevant; deleted terms may be

Ben Brooks

Bou-Simon v BGC Brokers is a reminder from the Court of Appeal that you can’t imply a term just because, in hindsight, it makes sense to. The test is much more stringent than that. Also, deletions from a previous draft of a contract may negative the implication of a term in the form of deleted words. Read More

No Comments