The following Dispute Resolution guidance note provides comprehensive and up to date legal information covering:
ARCHIVED: this archived Practice Note is not maintained and is for background information purposes only. Further, some of the links may not direct you to the provisions as at the date the guidance in this Practice Note was published.
The year 2016 has seen a number of issues considered in the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court on some key areas of contract dispute.
In this review of 2016, we consider:
the end of anti-oral variation clauses? (Globe Motors, Rock Advertising)—see below
creating contracts by conduct (Reveille v Anotech)—see below
when contracts must come to an end (MSC Mediterranean v Cottonex)—see below
limiting and excluding liability (Transocean Drilling, Star Polaris, Impact Funding, Nobahar-Cookson)—see below
when are Wrotham Park damages available? (One Step v Morris-Garner)—see below
damages for deceit (OMV Petrom v Glencore)—see below
Two cases in 2016 saw Court of Appeal decisions concerned with the efficacy of anti-oral variation clauses.
In Globe Motors v TRW Lucas Varity the parties had entered into an agreement that contained an anti-oral variation clause, ie that only variations agreed to by the parties in writing were permitted. The issue for the Court of Appeal was whether this precluded purported variation of the contract either
**excludes LexisPSL Practice Compliance, Practice Management and Risk and Compliance. To discuss trialling these LexisPSL services please email customer service via our online form. Free trials are only available to individuals based in the UK. We may terminate this trial at any time or decide not to give a trial, for any reason. Trial includes one question to LexisAsk during the length of the trial.
To view the latest version of this document and thousands of others like it, sign-in to LexisPSL or register for a free trial.
Existing user? Sign-in
Take a free trial
Take a free trial
0330 161 1234