header-logo header-logo

25 March 2016 / Chris Nillesen
Issue: 7692 / Categories: Features , Commercial
printer mail-detail

Keeping the faith

001_nlj_7692_nillesen

Can good faith be contractually implied, asks Chris Nillesen

The recent case of Portsmouth City Council v Ensign Highways Ltd [2015] EWHC 1969 (TCC), [2015] All ER (D) 146 (Jul) ( PCC ) sheds further light on the continuing debate on how good faith should (if at all) be implied in English contract law.

While English courts accept that parties to a contract cannot act fraudulently or dishonestly they have generally shied away from implying a duty of good faith. The concept of good faith is based on honesty and fair dealing. Bad faith, by way of contrast, has been distinguished from dishonest behaviour as behaviour that is “improper, commercially unacceptable or unconscionable”.

Parties to a contractual dispute are quick to convince themselves that the conduct of the other party was in “bad faith”. Morally there is perhaps an obligation to act in good faith, however can this be contractually implied?

English courts have reasoned primarily on the following three grounds that it is not appropriate to imply such a duty:

  1. Courts should principally avoid
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

Gateley Legal—Caroline Pope & Bob Maynard

Gateley Legal—Caroline Pope & Bob Maynard

Construction team bolstered by hire of senior consultant duo

Switalskis—four appointments

Switalskis—four appointments

Firm expands residential conveyancing team with quadruple appointment

mfg Solicitors—Claire Pope

mfg Solicitors—Claire Pope

Private client team welcomes senior associatein Worcester

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll