Source: All England Reporter
Publisher Citation: [2011] All ER (D) 150 (Jul)
Neutral Citation: [2011] EWHC 1637 (QB)
Court: Queen's Bench Division
Judge:

Coulson J

Representation Nicholas Strauss QC and Simon Johnson (instructed by Richard Slade and Company) for the claimant.
  The second and third claimants did not appear and were not represented.
  John Small and Greville Healey (instructed by Hill Dickson LLP) for the defendant.
Judgment Dates: 26 June 2011

Catchwords

Contract - Construction - Contractual term - Commercial sense - Franchise agreement - Franchise agreement granting various rights to first claimant entitling it to operate defendant's coffee shop business at premises sub-let by defendant - First claimant having to vacate possession of premises as result of break clause in underlease being triggered - First claimant alleging defendant thereby in breach of franchise agreement - Whether defendant in breach of franchise agreement - Proper construction of franchise agreement.

The Case

Contract Construction. The Queen's Bench Division held, on the proper construction of a franchise agreement between the first claimant and the defendant, that it was plain that cl2.2 of the franchise agreement did not provide the first claimant with the right to occupy the premises in question, whether for 5 or 10 years, or at all.

Practice Areas

If you are a LexisLibrary subscriber you can read more about this case here.