Source: All England Reporter
Publisher Citation: [2016] All ER (D) 68 (Apr)
Neutral Citation: [2016] EWCA Civ 372
Court: Court of Appeal, Civil Division

Moore-Bick VP, McFarlane and Briggs LJJ

Representation 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.
Judgment Dates: 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.

The Case

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.

Practice Areas

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