Rely on the most comprehensive, up-to-date legal content designed and curated by lawyers for lawyers
Work faster and smarter to improve your drafting productivity without increasing risk
Accelerate the creation and use of high quality and trusted legal documents and forms
Streamline how you manage your legal business with proven tools and processes
Manage risk and compliance in your organisation to reduce your risk profile
Stay up to date and informed with insights from our trusted experts, news and information sources
Access the best content in the industry, effortlessly — confident that your news is trustworthy and up to date.
With over 30 practice areas, we have all bases covered. Find out how we can help
Our trusted tax intelligence solutions, highly-regarded exam training and education materials help guide and tutor Tax professionals
Regulatory, business information and analytics solutions that help professionals make better decisions
A leading provider of software platforms for professional services firms
In-depth analysis, commentary and practical information to help you protect your business
LexisNexis Blogs shed light on topics affecting the legal profession and the issues you're facing
Legal professionals trust us to help navigate change. Find out how we help ensure they exceed expectations
Lex Chat is a LexisNexis current affairs podcast sharing insights on topics for the legal profession
Discuss the latest legal developments, ask questions, and share best practice with other LexisPSL subscribers
We’ve all made decisions under pressure, which later turn out to be poor.
In a commercial context, this may prove fatal as the court can still find that a binding contract has been created even when discussions are not recorded in writing.
We recently analysed the case of Corporate Oil and Gas Ltd v Marshall Aviation Services Ltd  EWHC 3447 (Comm),  All ER (D) 10 (Dec), in which the High Court upheld an informal agreement between two parties:
What was this case about?
The claimant owned a business jet aircraft (‘the aircraft’). The defendant company provided maintenance and repair services. The claimant delivered their aircraft to the defendant so that remedial works could be carried out.
[caption id="attachment_16116" align="alignleft" width="300"] [/caption]
The parties met to discuss, amongst other things, a discount on the defendant’s charges. The defendant asserted that a “‘gentleman’s agreement”’ had been reached and a discount and settlement amount for the work carried out to that date was agreed between the parties. The claimant disputed this and submitted that the agreement had been subject to confirmation by the CEO.
After the meeting th
Access this article and thousands of others like it free by subscribing to our blog.
Read full article
Already a subscriber? Login
0330 161 1234