- Damages for deceit (Inter Export LLC v Townley)
- What are the practical implications of this case?
- What was the background?
- What did the court decide?
- Case details
Commercial analysis: The Court of Appeal held that the judge had been entitled to find, on the evidence, that the second defendant (D2) had committed the tort of deceit and had not erred in her approach to the quantification of damages for that deceit (which was based on the market value of the goods). The court suggested that launching a ‘lack of reasons’ challenge against a judgment should be limited to circumstances where a party is unable to understand why a judge has reached a decision adverse to it. Written by Andrew Butler QC, barrister at Tanfield Chambers.
Sign in or take a trial to read the full analysis.
To continue reading this news article, as well as thousands of others like it, sign in to LexisPSL or register for a free trial