Dispute Resolution: key appeal cases—2015 [Archived]
Dispute Resolution: key appeal cases—2015 [Archived]

The following Dispute Resolution practice note provides comprehensive and up to date legal information covering:

  • Dispute Resolution: key appeal cases—2015 [Archived]
  • Court of Appeal—continuing breach and concurrent causes of action
  • Judgment and analysis
  • Case details
  • Court of Appeal—Part 36 costs consequences
  • Judgment and analysis
  • Case details
  • Court of Appeal—anti-enforcement injunctions
  • Judgment and analysis
  • Case details
  • More...

ARCHIVED: This Practice Note has been archived and is not maintained.

Court of Appeal—continuing breach and concurrent causes of action

The Court of Appeal has considered issues of continuing breach as a concurrent cause of action in seeking to apportion liability for losses in light of an indemnity in a share sale agreement which rendered the seller liable for losses arising out of services provided before the transfer date.

The issue was whether the pre-transfer negligence was considered to be a breach of duty continuing to occur after the transfer from day to day, such that daily a new cause of action arose which would mean that there was a concurrent cause of action alongside the indemnified breach which, per EE Caledonia, would prevent the appellant relying on the indemnity.

The majority view, differing from the first instance decision, held that there was no continuing breach thus no concurrent cause of action and the indemnity could therefore be relied on after the transfer date up until new fresh causes of action arose (as they did some nine months later). Lady Justice Gloster disagreed and upheld Popplewell J’s judgment in full.

In the course of the judgment, Lord Justice Longmore expressed the view that until some higher court decides otherwise, the inconsistency between the conflicting decisions in Midland Bank and Bell on continuing breach (both limitation cases) should be determined

Popular documents