||All England Reporter
|| All ER (D) 194 (May)
|| EWHC 1024 (Comm)
||Queen's Bench Division, Commercial Court
Andrew Smith J
||Michael Nolan (instructed by Davies Johnson & Co) for the claimant.
||Michael Collett (instructed by Ross & Co) for the defendant.
||14 May 2009
Practice - Summary judgment - Entitlement to summary judgment - Claimant refiner and wholesaler of petroleum products agreeing sale of oil to defendant - Claimant temporarily suspending loading of oil pending resolution of dispute as to price clause in agreement - Defendant retaining sum reflecting late delivery of oil - Claimant seeking payment of retained sum - Claimant applying for summary judgment in its claim - Whether claimant entitled to summary judgment.
Practice Summary judgment. Queen's Bench Division, Commercial Court: On the proper interpretation of the contract for sale of high sulphur fuel oil and light cycle oil, the parties intended that the price should be calculated and paid by reference to the bill of lading date notwithstanding late delivery by the claimant. The submission that effect should not be given to that intention on the grounds that the claimant would be taking advantage of its own wrong would be rejected and the claimant would be granted summary judgment in its claim for the sums retained by the defendant allegedly reflecting the late delivery.
- 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