| Source: | All England Reporter |
| Publisher Citation: | [2012] All ER (D) 141 (May) |
| Neutral Citation: | [2012] EWHC 1329 (Comm) |
| Court: | Queen's Bench Division, Commercial Court |
| Judge: | Teare J |
| Representation | Michael McLaren QC and John Taylor (instructed by Byrne and Partners LLP) for the claimant. |
| Akhil Shah QC and James Duffy (instructed by Bird & Bird LLP) for the defendant. | |
| Judgment Dates: | 18 May 2012 |
Catchwords
Practice - Summary judgment - Entitlement to summary judgment - Defence to claim - Claimant seeking repayment of deposit paid to defendant in respect of potential purchase of aircraft - Defendant contending that condition precedent to obligation to return deposit that claimant exercise good faith and reasonable endeavours - Claimant applying for summary judgment - Whether such condition precedent existing - Whether condition precedent enforceable in law - Whether defendant estopped from claiming that claimant failing to exercise good faith and reasonable endeavours - Whether summary judgment should be granted.
The Case
Practice Summary judgment. The Commercial Court of the Queen's Bench Division held that the defendant had no real prospect of successfully defending a claim for the return of a claimant's deposit of US$3.55m in respect of the intended purchase of an aircraft. The defendant was obliged to refund the deposit.
Lexis®Library
- 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
- 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
- Cases related to this particular case that are related to, or discuss this caseView related cases
