||All England Reporter
|| All ER (D) 29 (Jan)
|| EWHC 3452 (QB)
||Queen's Bench Division
James Goudie QC sitting as a judge of the High Court
||R Higgans (instructed by Ronalssons LLP) for the claimant.
||J Segan (instructed by Forbes Andreson Free) for the defendant.
||30 October 2012
Contract - Breach - Damages - Parties agreeing orally regarding advertising champagne with third party - Third party failing to receive payment and bringing action against claimant - Claimant suing defendant in damages - Defendant denying existence of contract - Whether oral contract existing - Whether and to what extent claimant entitled to damages.
Contract Breach. There was an alleged agreement between the parties and for dressing of taxis with the defendant's advertising material.Disputes arose and TML sought payment from the claimant. The claimant sued the defendant for the monies allegedly owed and the defendant contended that there was no contract in place. The Queen's Bench Division held that there had been a valid oral contract in place and that the claimant was entitled to an amount of damages.
- 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