Breach of Warranty in UK Law
-
Gilbert Ash (Northern) Ltd v Modern Engineering (Bristol) Ltd
“
But in construing such a contract one starts with the presumption that neither party intends to abandon any remedies for its breach arising by operation of law, and clear express words must be used in order to rebut this presumption.
-
RWE Nukem Ltd v AEA Technology Plc
“
However, consistent with Mr. Rowley's submissions, I would expect that a compliant notice would identify the particular warranty that was alleged to have been breached; I would expect that, at least in general terms, the notice would explain why it had been breached, with at least some sort of particularisation of the facts upon which such an allegation was based, and would give at least some sort of indication of what loss had been suffered as a result of the breach of warranty, or, in other words, in the language of paragraph 1 of Schedule 9, some sort of description of the "liability for breach of the Warranties" that it was alleged that AEAT had incurred.
-
Doyle v Olby (Ironmongers) Ltd
“
In contract, the damages are limited to what may reasonably be supposed to have been in this contemplation of the parties. The defendant is bound to make reparation for all the actual damages directly flowing from the fraudulent inducement. All such damages can be recovered: and it does not lie in the mouth of the fraudulent person to say that they could not reasonably have been foreseen.
-
Oliver Nobahar-Cookson and Another v The Hut Group Ltd
“
The parties are not lightly to be taken to have intended to cut down the remedies which the law provides for breach of important contractual obligations without using clear words having that effect: see Gilbert-Ash (Northern) Ltd v Modern Engineering (Bristol) Ltd [1974] AC 689 per Lord Diplock at 717H, applied in Seadrill Management Services Ltd v OAO Gazprom [2010] EWCA Civ 691, by Moore-Bick LJ at para 29.
-
Bentley (Dick) Productions Ltd v Harold Smith (Motors) Ltd
“
Looking at the cases once more, as we have done so often, it seems to me that if a representation is made in the course of dealings for a contract for the very purpose of inducing the other party to act upon it, and actually inducing him to act upon it, by entering into the contract, that is prima facie ground for inferring that it was intended as a warranty. Suffice it that it was intended to be acted upon and was in fact acted on.
-
Senate Electrical Wholesalers Ltd v Alcatel Submarine Networks Ltd (formerly STC Submarine Systems Ltd)
“
Certainty is only achieved when the vendor is left in no reasonable doubt not only that a claim may be brought but of the particulars of the ground upon which the claim is to be based. Notice in writing is required in order to constitute the record which dispels the need for further argument and creates the certainty.
-
Rok Plc ((in Administration)) v S Harrison Group Ltd
“
In my judgment the stipulation that "the nature of the Claim" be specified "in reasonable detail" requires, as a minimum, that the notice should identify the contractual provision under which the Claim is said to arise. It would not, in my judgment, have been sufficient for a notice to state simply, "ROK hereby notifies you that it has a Claim for breach (or breaches) of Warranty (estimated at £x)".
-
Insurance Act 2015
... ... 8: Remedies for breach ... (1) The insurer has a remedy against the insured for a breach of the ... (2) Such a representation is not capable of being converted into a warranty by means of any provision of the non-consumer insurance contract (or of ... ...
-
Sale of Goods Act 1893
... ... When condition to be treated as warranty. 11 When condition to be treated as warranty ... (1) —(1.) In ... may elect to treat the breach of such condition as a breach ... of warranty, and not as a ground for ... ...
-
Sale of Goods Act 1979
... ... 11: When condition to be treated as warranty ... (1) This section does not apply to Scotland ... (2) Where a ... , the buyer may waive the condition, or may elect to treat the breach of the condition as a breach of warranty and not as a ground for treating ... ...
-
Marine Insurance Act 1906
... ... reason of any express or implied warranty ... (4) Whether any particular circumstance, which is not disclosed, ... from the date of the breach of warranty, but without prejudice ... to any liability incurred by him ... ...
- The Law Commission Working Paper No. 73: Non‐Disclosure and Breach of Warranty in Insurance Law
-
Reconstructing Insurance Law: The Law Commissions' Consultation Paper
In July 2007 the English and Scottish Law Commissions published the consultation paper Insurance Law – Non‐disclosure and Breach of Warranty (hereafter LCCP) which sets out in detail the Commission...... ... Insurance C ontract Law : Misrepre sentation , Non-Disclosu re and Breach of W arranty bythe Insure d (2007), http://www .lawcom.gov ... W ARRANTIES OF FA CT A warranty of fact is simply a pre-contract r epresentation w hich has been con- ... ...
-
Reports of Committees
... ... 1959, Department of Health Review of Non-Disclosure and Breach of Warranty in Insurance Law, Law Com- Penal System, Report ... ...
-
THE PROTECTION OF THE PURCHASER AND CONSUMER UNDER THE LAW OF THE U.S.A.*
... ... be convenient to do so under three heads, negligence, breach of warranty, and strict liability in tort. But it must be ... ...
-
Measure of Damages for Breach of Warranty
Oversea-Chinese Banking Corporation Ltd v ING Bank NV [2019] EWHC 676 (Comm) saw a creative argument put forward in the High Court regarding the measure of damages for breach of warranty in a share...
-
M&A Dispute Provides Rare Glimpse Into English Courts’ Approach to Breach of Warranty Claims
English M&A counsel are often heard telling their clients that breach of warranty claims will likely settle out of court. This certainly seems to have been the case in the past, and we are all awar...
-
Breach of Warranty Claims – Teoco UK Limited (Claimant) v Aircom Jersey 4 Limited and Aircom Global Operations Limited (Defendants) [2015] EWHC (Ch)
In the recent case of Teoco UK Limited v Aircom Jersey 4 Limited and Aircom Global Operations Limited [2015] EWHC (Ch), the High Court considered the validity of breach of warranty claim notificati...
- Breach Of Warranty Is Not Misrepresentation