||All England Reporter
|| All ER (D) 107 (May)
|| EWHC 982 (QB)
||Queen's Bench Division
||James Brocklebank (instructed by Turners LLP) for the claimant.
||Nicholas Craig (instructed by Pilsbury Winthrop Shaw & Pittman LLP) for the defendant.
||12 May 2009
Contract - Construction - Conduct of parties - Claimant and defendant entering into agreement for claimant to be sole distributor of defendant's product in United Kingdom and Ireland - Parties not entering into written agreement - Claimant contending conduct of parties showing they were acting on its terms - Whether claimant establishing conduct of parties showing they were acting on its terms - Whether defendant entitled to terminate for repudiatory breach.
Contract Construction. Queen's Bench Division: The court ruled that it was trite law that terms of an agreement could be accepted by conduct, and that the burden of showing that parties had acted on the terms of a written agreement which had not been executed lay on the party so contending. In the instant case, that burden had not been discharged.
- An Official transcript is the final version of the judgment prepared by shorthand writers. LexisLibrary contains all judgments from the High Court and aboveView Judgment
- Cases related to this particular case that are related to, or discuss this caseView related cases
- Commentary discussing this particular case from LexisLibrary's comprehensive range of titles including Butterworths, Halsbury's and TolleyView related commentary
- The All England Law Reports comprises judgments with headnotes and catchwords indicating the area of law and key issues of the case prepared by legally qualified editorsFind AllER Reports