header-logo header-logo

Keeping the faith

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

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