header-logo header-logo

18 July 2014
Issue: 7615 / Categories: Case law , Law digest , In Court
printer mail-detail

Damages

Ageas (UK) Ltd v Kwik-Fit (GB) Ltd and another [2014] EWHC 2178 (QB), [2014] All ER (D) 60 (Jul)

When assessing damages for breach of contract by reference to the value of a company or other property at the date of breach, whose value depended upon a future contingency, account could be taken of what was subsequently known about the outcome of the contingency as a result of events subsequent to the valuation date where that was necessary in order to give effect to the compensatory principle. In an appropriate case, the valuation could be made with the benefit of hindsight, taking account of what was known of the outcome of the contingency at the time that the assessment fell to be made by the court. That was so not merely as a cross check against the reasonableness of prospective forecasting. It was so whatever view might prospectively be taken at the breach date of the outcome of the contingency. There were two qualifications however. The first was that it could only be justified where it was necessary

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: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

NLJ Career Profile: Ken Fowlie, Stowe Family Law

Ken Fowlie, chairman of Stowe Family Law, reflects on more than 30 years in legal services after ‘falling into law’

Gardner Leader—Michelle Morgan & Catherine Morris

Gardner Leader—Michelle Morgan & Catherine Morris

Regional law firm expands employment team with partner and senior associate hires

Freeths—Carly Harwood & Tom Newton

Freeths—Carly Harwood & Tom Newton

Nottinghamtrusts, estates and tax team welcomes two senior associates

NEWS
Children can claim for ‘lost years’ damages in personal injury cases, the Supreme Court has held in a landmark judgment
The cab-rank rule remains a bulwark of the rule of law, yet lawyers are increasingly judged by their clients’ causes. Writing in NLJ this week, Ian McDougall, president of the LexisNexis Rule of Law Foundation, warns that conflating representation with endorsement is a ‘clear and present danger’
Holiday lets may promise easy returns, but restrictive covenants can swiftly scupper plans. Writing in NLJ this week, Andrew Francis of Serle Court recounts how covenants limiting use to a ‘private dwelling house’ or ‘private residence’ have repeatedly defeated short-term letting schemes
Artificial intelligence (AI) is already embedded in the civil courts, but regulation lags behind practice. Writing in NLJ this week, Ben Roe of Baker McKenzie charts a landscape where AI assists with transcription, case management and document handling, yet raises acute concerns over evidence, advocacy and even judgment-writing
The Supreme Court has drawn a firm line under branding creativity in regulated markets. In Dairy UK Ltd v Oatly AB, it ruled that Oatly’s ‘post-milk generation’ trade mark unlawfully deployed a protected dairy designation. In NLJ this week, Asima Rana of DWF explains that the court prioritised ‘regulatory clarity over creative branding choices’, holding that ‘designation’ extends beyond product names to marketing slogans
back-to-top-scroll