header-logo header-logo

Change happens

05 June 2015 / Chris Nillesen
Issue: 7655 / Categories: Features , Procedure & practice
printer mail-detail
nlj_7655_nillesen

Contractual changes can be agreed despite not meeting contract formalities, says Chris Nillesen

The recent cases of Globe Motors Inc and others v TRW Lucas Varity Electric Steering Ltd [2014] EHWC 3718 (Comm) and Virulite LLC v Virulite Distribution Ltd [2014] EHWC 366 (QB), [2014] All ER (D) 37 (Mar) serve as timely reminders of the importance of understanding how changes to contracts can be agreed and what contracting parties should be aware of.

Forever friends

Long term contractual relationships, whether for the acquisition of goods or services are invariably subject to change. Prices, laws, contracting parties, technology, standards and practices all change over time. Contracts depending on their length, value and scope can address such changes through a variety of measures. However it is advisable for the parties to consider at the outset how changes will be managed and in particular who should bear the cost of change. Simply ignoring the likelihood and the implication of change could instigate a contractual dispute.

The Globe case was a complex dispute regarding the design of

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll