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: 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