UK: English Contract Law 2013: Signposting Some Highlights

Last Updated: 30 January 2014
Article by Andrew White

Authors' note: signposts, not analysis

Dear readers: we have kept this bulletin brief. Our aim is to signpost some developments, rather than analyse them. If any of you would like more detail – factual or legal –by all means contact us. Thanks to our colleagues, associates Ben Hughes and Isabelle Paton, for their comments on the draft of this bulletin. Andrew White with Esther Johnson, January 2014.

The impact of good faith cooperation clauses

Written good faith cooperation clauses in commercial agreements have been legally enforceable for a while (see for instance Berkeley Community Villages v Pullen (2007)). The issue is how they inter-relate with other clauses in a commercial arrangement. In Compass Group v Mid-Essex NHS Trust (March 2013), the Court of Appeal held that a 'good faith cooperation' clause in a long-term catering services agreement was in principle enforceable. But on a close interpretation of the clause, and the surrounding facts, it held that the customer was not in breach. More importantly, the Court warned that a written good faith clause should not be interpreted in a way which potentially cuts across other written provisions of a commercial contract, and any contractual safeguards which expressly apply.

Within weeks that message was heeded by the High Court in TSG v South Anglia Housing (2013), when a party's right to terminate a long-term building maintenance contract in accordance with its written terms was held not to be constrained by a "duty to cooperate" clause elsewhere in the contract. The parties had "freely negotiated" the termination arrangements, and the Court held that the general cooperation clause should not be applied in a way which cut across that termination regime. This lesson is relevant across all types of B2B agreements.

An implied term of 'honesty' in business-to-business agreements

By not being open to an implied term of 'good faith' in certain commercial contracts, English law is "swimming against the tide", said Mr Justice Leggatt in the February 2013 High Court decision of Yam Seng v ITC. The judge held that an implied term of good faith, in the sense of honesty, should be read into a 2½ year distribution agreement for branded fragrances and toiletries which had broken down. Such an implied term would "reflect the shared values and norms" of the parties, and would help to bring English law into closer alignment with other countries. But when should such a term be implied? The judge said: "in long-term contracts such as some joint ventures, franchise and distribution agreements". This is not an exhaustive list. By extension, we believe that the term could apply to other long-term agreements which are relationship-based, and require ongoing communication and cooperation between the parties. The impact of this is likely to be explored further in 2014. In October 2013 the High Court held (in Boots v Hamsard) that a short-term agreement for the supply of stock to a retailer by a supplier in acute financial difficulty was not a "relationship-based" agreement in which good faith could be implied.

'Good faith' and contractual discretion

It is well-established that a genuine discretion under a commercial contract must be exercised in "good faith" and not in a way that is "arbitrary", "capricious" or "irrational" (see the Court of Appeal in Socimer v Standard Bank 2008 - just one of a trail of decisions). The Court of Appeal took this principle for granted in another aspect of the Compass Group case mentioned above, though on the facts, the NHS Trust was held not to have abused its discretion. In the last five years there has been a flurry of cases demonstrating this principle, mainly in the finance sector. In 2014, we expect more such cases, including in non-financial contexts.

Contract interpretation: the continuing impact of the ICS rules

Interpreting a contract requires experience, intuition, knowledge of the facts and context, as well as awareness of key legal principles. The Supreme Court (then the House of Lords) distilled these principles in ICS v West Bromwich in 1997. Our research, using the main legal information databases, shows that since 1997, the ICS rules have been relied upon over 1,000 times in reported decisions. In 2013 this trend continued as the ICS rules were again cited many times as the courts' starting point for resolving interpretation disputes. ICS, combined with the Supreme Court decisions in Chartbrook v Persimmon(2009) and Rainy Sky v Kookmin Bank (2011), have extremely powerful influence. As at September 2013, the Rainy Sky case, on giving ambiguous clauses a "commercially sensible" interpretation, had itself been cited over 300 times in later court decisions.

Does leaving matters "to be agreed" make a contract unenforceable?

An obligation to deliver products can be legally enforceable even if significant aspects of the arrangement are "still to be agreed" by the parties. That was the conclusion of the Court of Appeal in February 2013 in MRI Trading v Erdenet. Why wasn't the obligation to deliver too "uncertain" and therefore an unenforceable "agreement to agree"? Because, in essence, the context of the obligation was a package of previously concluded contracts which were unquestionably binding and which the parties had performed. The Court of Appeal held that the parties' intention was to perform a series of delivery contracts and to utilise agreed contractual machinery to resolve matters still outstanding (ie "to be agreed"), rather than refusing to deliver on the grounds of uncertainty.

In this latest case, the Court of Appeal and the High Court each concluded that the expert arbitrators who had originally heard the case got the law "obviously wrong". Anyone who thinks that the law on contract formation is basic or predictable should read this case. It shows the vital importance of distinguishing the different legal principles which apply, on the one hand, to the pre-contract phase and, on the other hand, to concluded long-term arrangements. Many businesses are not yet drawing that distinction.

Contract abandonment, customer 'walkaway' and exclusion clauses

What's the consequence of abandoning an entire long-term contract mid-way through, in deliberate breach? It's well-established that the liability of the defaulting party can in principle be subject to a strong exclusion clause in its favour. It depends ultimately on contract interpretation. This issue has caused controversy: see the High Court decision of NetTV v MARHedge (2009), and the explicit criticism of that decision by another High Court judge in AstraZeneca v Albemarle (2011). In February 2013 this issue surfaced again, this time in the Court of Appeal in Kudos Catering v Manchester Central Convention Complex. In this instance the customer, which abandoned a 5-year exclusive catering deal with 20 months still to run, was held unable to rely on an exclusion clause in its favour in the face of a damages claim by the service provider. It wasn't for a reason of public policy but because the Court of Appeal interpreted the clause narrowly, in all the factual circumstances, so as not to apply to the customer's own refusal to perform the remainder of the contract. It's important to see the Kudos decision in the current economic climate. With many contracting parties looking to exit long-term arrangements early, the legal consequences of doing so will continue to be a major factor (though often not the key one) in their commercial calculations. Kudos is an illustration of what can happen; not a precedent for what will happen.

The law on penalties is steadily evolving: a milestone corporate case

In the last 10 years, the law on penalties and liquidated damages has steadily evolved. And the 2013 Court of Appeal decision in Talal El Makdessi v Cavendish Square has accelerated that trend. Cavendish have applied for permission to challenge the decision in the Supreme Court. And indeed the Court of Appeal decision may be reversed on the facts. But the legal principles which are being applied have unquestionably developed. Whatever the final outcome, this case is already a milestone.

It used to be necessary to show that a pre-payment clause for breach was a "genuine pre-estimate of loss" to be valid and enforceable as liquidated damages. Otherwise the payment was a penalty. Nowadays, however, the courts apply a "more modern approach". If the payment arrangement is "commercially justifiable", and its "dominant purpose" is not to deter breach by the other party, then the clause may be enforceable even if the clause is not shown to be a genuine pre-estimate of loss.

In the Talal El Makdessi case, the seller of a business stood to forfeit as much as $44m of the sale price of a media business in the Middle East, for having breached covenants post-completion restricting him from competing with the sold business. (The seller would also forego certain post-sale options). The High Court held that these mechanisms were valid and enforceable. But in November 2013 a unanimous Court of Appeal reversed that decision and held that the provisions were a penalty, and unenforceable by the purchaser. Firstly, the financial sum forfeited was "way beyond" the maximum damage that the purchaser could have recovered via a contract damages claim. But that was not the end of the matter. Taking issue with the High Court, the Court of Appeal held that the mechanism was not "commercially justified" and that its primary purpose was to deter breach. The clause therefore failed to satisfy either the old-established test for valid liquidated damages, or the more "modern" approach. Therefore it was legally unenforceable.

Corporate lawyers in particular should take note of this case. It would be a mistake to confine it to the specific facts, and clauses. Rather, it should be read as a vivid reminder that normal contractual principles apply even to fully negotiated payment arrangements in corporate transactions, entered into with the support of experienced firms of lawyers. There may be drafting solutions to reduce risk – indeed the Court of Appeal hints at this. But the biggest question is – on what basis should the English courts intervene in these types of disputes in the first place?

Non-reliance clauses and pre-contractual representations

Finally, a word on non-reliance clauses. These are the so-called "boilerplate" statements which providers of products, services and facilities often use to minimise the risk of being held liable to their clients or customers for pre-contract misrepresentation by their sales teams. An important 2010 High Court case called Henry Boot v FoodCo set out several reasons why such a non-reliance clause could in principle be considered reasonable under the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977. In November 2013, in a case called Lloyd v Browning, the Court of Appeal endorsed the reasoning in Henry Boot. Of course, the enforceability of non-reliance clauses will ultimately depend on the facts and context. But this development provides important support to non-reliance clauses, generally speaking, in the B2B context.

Trend-spotting: the growing use of visual tools

An authoritative recent survey of international contracting trends by the IACCM (International Association of Commercial Contract Management – www.iaccm.com) has revealed that 62% of the 2000 businesses which responded expect an increased use of "visual techniques" in contracting. This is our "trend of the year". Contracts are global tools. And people think in ever-more visual terms. So visual techniques are an inevitable result. Of course, no amount of visual techniques should diminish the need for clarity and certainty in contract drafting. But we have a message for connoisseurs of flow-charts, mind-maps, colourful tables and obligation matrices to support contract negotiation and management. These are no longer fringe activities. The market trend shows that your moment has arrived.....!!

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Authors
 
In association with
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Tools
Print
Font Size:
Translation
Channels
Mondaq on Twitter
 
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
 
Email Address
Company Name
Password
Confirm Password
Position
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Accounting
 Anti-trust
 Commercial
 Compliance
 Consumer
 Criminal
 Employment
 Energy
 Environment
 Family
 Finance
 Government
 Healthcare
 Immigration
 Insolvency
 Insurance
 International
 IP
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Litigation
 Media & IT
 Privacy
 Real Estate
 Strategy
 Tax
 Technology
 Transport
 Wealth Mgt
Regions
Africa
Asia
Asia Pacific
Australasia
Canada
Caribbean
Europe
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
U.K.
United States
Worldwide Updates
Check to state you have read and
agree to our Terms and Conditions

Terms & Conditions and Privacy Statement

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd and as a user you are granted a non-exclusive, revocable license to access the Website under its terms and conditions of use. Your use of the Website constitutes your agreement to the following terms and conditions of use. Mondaq Ltd may terminate your use of the Website if you are in breach of these terms and conditions or if Mondaq Ltd decides to terminate your license of use for whatever reason.

Use of www.mondaq.com

You may use the Website but are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the content and articles available (the Content). You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these terms & conditions or with the prior written consent of Mondaq Ltd. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information about Mondaq.com’s content, users or contributors in order to offer them any services or products which compete directly or indirectly with Mondaq Ltd’s services and products.

Disclaimer

Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the documents and related graphics published on this server for any purpose. All such documents and related graphics are provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers hereby disclaim all warranties and conditions with regard to this information, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of information available from this server.

The documents and related graphics published on this server could include technical inaccuracies or typographical errors. Changes are periodically added to the information herein. Mondaq Ltd and/or its respective suppliers may make improvements and/or changes in the product(s) and/or the program(s) described herein at any time.

Registration

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including what sort of information you are interested in, for three primary purposes:

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, newsletter alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our information providers who provide information free for your use.

Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) do not sell or provide your details to third parties other than information providers. The reason we provide our information providers with this information is so that they can measure the response their articles are receiving and provide you with information about their products and services.

If you do not want us to provide your name and email address you may opt out by clicking here .

If you do not wish to receive any future announcements of products and services offered by Mondaq by clicking here .

Information Collection and Use

We require site users to register with Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to view the free information on the site. We also collect information from our users at several different points on the websites: this is so that we can customise the sites according to individual usage, provide 'session-aware' functionality, and ensure that content is acquired and developed appropriately. This gives us an overall picture of our user profiles, which in turn shows to our Editorial Contributors the type of person they are reaching by posting articles on Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) – meaning more free content for registered users.

We are only able to provide the material on the Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) site free to site visitors because we can pass on information about the pages that users are viewing and the personal information users provide to us (e.g. email addresses) to reputable contributing firms such as law firms who author those pages. We do not sell or rent information to anyone else other than the authors of those pages, who may change from time to time. Should you wish us not to disclose your details to any of these parties, please tick the box above or tick the box marked "Opt out of Registration Information Disclosure" on the Your Profile page. We and our author organisations may only contact you via email or other means if you allow us to do so. Users can opt out of contact when they register on the site, or send an email to unsubscribe@mondaq.com with “no disclosure” in the subject heading

Mondaq News Alerts

In order to receive Mondaq News Alerts, users have to complete a separate registration form. This is a personalised service where users choose regions and topics of interest and we send it only to those users who have requested it. Users can stop receiving these Alerts by going to the Mondaq News Alerts page and deselecting all interest areas. In the same way users can amend their personal preferences to add or remove subject areas.

Cookies

A cookie is a small text file written to a user’s hard drive that contains an identifying user number. The cookies do not contain any personal information about users. We use the cookie so users do not have to log in every time they use the service and the cookie will automatically expire if you do not visit the Mondaq website (or its affiliate sites) for 12 months. We also use the cookie to personalise a user's experience of the site (for example to show information specific to a user's region). As the Mondaq sites are fully personalised and cookies are essential to its core technology the site will function unpredictably with browsers that do not support cookies - or where cookies are disabled (in these circumstances we advise you to attempt to locate the information you require elsewhere on the web). However if you are concerned about the presence of a Mondaq cookie on your machine you can also choose to expire the cookie immediately (remove it) by selecting the 'Log Off' menu option as the last thing you do when you use the site.

Some of our business partners may use cookies on our site (for example, advertisers). However, we have no access to or control over these cookies and we are not aware of any at present that do so.

Log Files

We use IP addresses to analyse trends, administer the site, track movement, and gather broad demographic information for aggregate use. IP addresses are not linked to personally identifiable information.

Links

This web site contains links to other sites. Please be aware that Mondaq (or its affiliate sites) are not responsible for the privacy practices of such other sites. We encourage our users to be aware when they leave our site and to read the privacy statements of these third party sites. This privacy statement applies solely to information collected by this Web site.

Surveys & Contests

From time-to-time our site requests information from users via surveys or contests. Participation in these surveys or contests is completely voluntary and the user therefore has a choice whether or not to disclose any information requested. Information requested may include contact information (such as name and delivery address), and demographic information (such as postcode, age level). Contact information will be used to notify the winners and award prizes. Survey information will be used for purposes of monitoring or improving the functionality of the site.

Mail-A-Friend

If a user elects to use our referral service for informing a friend about our site, we ask them for the friend’s name and email address. Mondaq stores this information and may contact the friend to invite them to register with Mondaq, but they will not be contacted more than once. The friend may contact Mondaq to request the removal of this information from our database.

Security

This website takes every reasonable precaution to protect our users’ information. When users submit sensitive information via the website, your information is protected using firewalls and other security technology. If you have any questions about the security at our website, you can send an email to webmaster@mondaq.com.

Correcting/Updating Personal Information

If a user’s personally identifiable information changes (such as postcode), or if a user no longer desires our service, we will endeavour to provide a way to correct, update or remove that user’s personal data provided to us. This can usually be done at the “Your Profile” page or by sending an email to EditorialAdvisor@mondaq.com.

Notification of Changes

If we decide to change our Terms & Conditions or Privacy Policy, we will post those changes on our site so our users are always aware of what information we collect, how we use it, and under what circumstances, if any, we disclose it. If at any point we decide to use personally identifiable information in a manner different from that stated at the time it was collected, we will notify users by way of an email. Users will have a choice as to whether or not we use their information in this different manner. We will use information in accordance with the privacy policy under which the information was collected.

How to contact Mondaq

You can contact us with comments or queries at enquiries@mondaq.com.

If for some reason you believe Mondaq Ltd. has not adhered to these principles, please notify us by e-mail at problems@mondaq.com and we will use commercially reasonable efforts to determine and correct the problem promptly.