Morris-Garner v One Step (Support) Ltd [2016] EWCA Civ 180; [2018] UKSC 20 – Law Journals

Negligent misstatement: Bouncing bunnies

Andrew Burnette looks at liability and the unknown: can the provider of a reference be responsible if it doesn’t know who will rely on it? ‘Taking into consideration the principles set out in both Hedley Byrne and Caparo, the Supreme Court found that in the circumstances of the Playboy case it simply was not possible …

Continue reading "Negligent misstatement: Bouncing bunnies"

This post is only available to members.

Remedies: One small step

Gwendoline Davies explores Supreme Court case law on contractual damages ‘It is necessary for the court to consider post-breach events known at the assessment of damages if they are relevant to and affect the claimant’s loss.’ Commercial parties are generally aware that a breach of contract gives rise, in the majority of cases, to a …

Continue reading "Remedies: One small step"

This post is only available to members.

Case study: What is it worth?

Andrew Francis considers how far the Supreme Court’s decision in Morris-Garner opens up the question of compensation awarded by the Upper Tribunal (Lands Chamber) in applications to discharge or modify covenants under s84(1) of the LPA 1925 ‘What is clear is that property practitioners in particular will need to remind themselves not just of the …

Continue reading "Case study: What is it worth?"

This post is only available to members.

Insights by Penningtons Manches: Over the finish line?

Clare Arthurs and Nicole Finlayson consider Wrotham Park damages and how the range of circumstances in which they can be claimed has narrowed ‘The Supreme Court’s landmark decision in Morris-Garner offers authority, at the highest level, on a sometimes confusing line of cases, and a conceptually tricky area of law.’ In the week that the …

Continue reading "Insights by Penningtons Manches: Over the finish line?"

This post is only available to members.

Awards for damages: One Step could not side-step usual contract breach principles

Wrotham Park damages are unavailable in most employment cases even if it is difficult to quantify the losses from an employee’s contractual breach, write Emma Bartlett and Emma Humphreys ‘In Morris-Garner, while the company’s losses were difficult to quantify, these consisted of loss of profits and goodwill and could be assessed in the conventional manner.’ …

Continue reading "Awards for damages: One Step could not side-step usual contract breach principles"

This post is only available to members.

The Year Ahead: What to expect in 2018

Matthew Towers and Emily Skinner outline the key developments that employers and their advisers should prepare for in the next 12 months ‘The Conservative manifesto and the Queen’s Speech made a clear commitment to act after the Taylor review to ensure that people working in the gig economy are protected. What form that action will …

Continue reading "The Year Ahead: What to expect in 2018"

This post is only available to members.

Remedies: A walk in the park

Kayleigh Bloomfield looks at Wrotham Park damages ‘The Wrotham Park remedy attempts to quantify a sum which might reasonably have been negotiated between the parties as a quid pro quo for giving permission to the wrongdoer to act contrary to his or her contractual obligations.’ Restrictive covenants may be instinctively characterised as belonging to the …

Continue reading "Remedies: A walk in the park"

This post is only available to members.

Post-Termination Restrictions: Winning damages in One Step

A recent Court of Appeal decision may make it easier for employers to obtain Wrotham Park damages, explains Bob Fahy ‘Devenish can leave a claimant in difficulties where the problem is a lack of evidence to demonstrate loss. One potential solution is to seek Wrotham Park damages.’The remedies available where an ex-employee has unlawfully used …

Continue reading "Post-Termination Restrictions: Winning damages in One Step"

This post is only available to members.