header-logo header-logo

12 February 2009 / Sara Partington
Issue: 7356 / Categories: Features
printer mail-detail

A costly delay

Contractual clauses won’t always offer protection if you delay in reacting. Sara Partington reports

The Court of Appeal last month confirmed that, if Party A delays or fails to react to Party’s B material breach, it can be held to have affirmed the contract despite the agreement containing a clause to the eff ect that delay, neglect or forbearance in enforcing a provision will not be deemed a waiver nor in any way prejudice any right under the agreement. Th at then is a long way of saying that parties to commercial contracts cannot blithely rely on such clauses to excuse them from delay or neglect in acting upon a counterparty’s breach. Protection cannot necessarily be assumed merely from a clause in a contract: a court may nonetheless find that a party has by conduct elected to affi rm the contract and thereby abandoned contractual rights to terminate for material breach.
Appellant companies (T) in Tele2 International Card Co SA (and others) v Post Offi ce Ltd [2009] EWCA Civ 9 entered into an agreement with

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

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

NLJ Career Profile: Nikki Bowker, Devonshires

Nikki Bowker, head of litigation and dispute resolution at Devonshires, on career resilience, diversity in law and channelling Elle Woods when the pressure is on

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Ellisons—Sarah Osborne

Leasehold enfranchisement specialist joins residential property team

DWF—Chris Air

DWF—Chris Air

Firm strengthens commercial team in Manchester with partner appointment

NEWS
Contract damages are usually assessed at the date of breach—but not always. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Gascoigne, knowledge lawyer at LexisNexis, examines the growing body of cases where courts have allowed later events to reshape compensation
The Supreme Court has restored ‘doctrinal coherence’ to unfair prejudice litigation, writes Natalie Quinlivan, partner at Fieldfisher LLP, in this week' NLJ
The High Court’s refusal to recognise a prolific sperm donor as a child’s legal parent has highlighted the risks of informal conception arrangements, according to Liam Hurren, associate at Kingsley Napley, in NLJ this week
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Mazur may have settled questions around litigation supervision, but the profession should not simply ‘move on’, argues Jennifer Coupland, CEO of CILEX, in this week's NLJ
A simple phrase like ‘subject to references’ may not protect employers as much as they think. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian Smith, barrister and emeritus professor of employment law at UEA, analyses recent employment cases showing how conditional job offers can still create binding contracts
back-to-top-scroll