||All England Reporter
|| All ER (D) 68 (Apr)
|| EWCA Civ 372
||Court of Appeal, Civil Division
Moore-Bick VP, McFarlane and Briggs LJJ
||Laurence Rabinowitz QC and Colin West (instructed by Ince & Co LLP) for Transocean.
||John McCaughran QC and Laurence Emmett (instructed by Herbert Smith Freehills LLP) for Providence.
||13 April 2016
Contract - Damages for breach - Foreseeable consequence of breach - Exclusion clause - Claimant appealing against judge's decision defendant being entitled to recover spread costs for period of delay caused by breach of contract - Whether defendant's costs being 'consequential losses' within meaning of exclusion clause - Whether defendant being entitled to costs on basis of set-off.
Contract Damages for breach. The Court of Appeal, Civil Division, allowed the claimant's appeal against the judge's decision that the defendant was entitled to recover spread costs for a period of delay caused by the claimant's breach of contract. The language of the exclusion clause in the contract in LOGIC form was clear and was apt to exclude liability for wasted costs in the form of the spread costs which the defendant sought to recover.
- 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