Source: All England Reporter
Publisher Citation: [2002] All ER (D) 370 (Mar)
Court: Chancery Division
Judge:

Michael Briggs QC siting as a deputy judge of the High Court

Representation Sonia Tolaney (instructed by Allen & Overy) for the claimant.
  Lexa Hilliard (instructed by Taylor Johnson Garrett) for the defendant.
Judgment Dates: 22 March 2002

Catchwords

Chose in action - Assignment - Rights included in chose in action - Parties executing assignment agreement - Defendant subsequently assigning tranches of principal received from claimant to third party - Third party assigning part of defendant's debt to other party - Claimant claiming defendant's assignment in breach of trust and implied terms of assignment agreement - Whether defendant in breach of trust - Whether defendant in breach of implied terms of assignment agreement.

The Case

It was well-established that any predicated implied term would be required to satisfy both the general test of necessity, and the more specific officious bystander test which applied where the implied term was said to arise as part of the particular contract in question, rather than as being an incident of a particular class of contract. In the instant case, the claimant's claim that the subsequent assignment of the chose in action was in breach of the implied terms of the assignment agreement would be rejected as there was no evidence of any common practice or perception giving rise to such implied terms.

Practice Areas

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