P & S Amusements Ltd v Valley House Leisure Ltd & Anor [2006] EWHC 1510 (Ch) (26 June 2006)

P & S Amusements Ltd v Valley House Leisure Ltd & Anor [2006] EWHC 1510 (Ch) (26 June 2006)

The tenant's competition law defences under ss.2 and 18 of the Competition Act 1998 are summarily dismissed as they are inadequately pleaded, unsupported by primary facts, and there is no real prospect of establishing that the beer tie appreciably restricts competition or involves abuse of a dominant position. The landlord is permitted to amend its claim to allege an implied term regarding negotiation of discounts, but no summary declaration is granted as to the implication of such a term.

Citation
[2006] EWHC 1510 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: P & S Amusements Limited; First Defendant: Valley House Leisure Limited; Second Defendant: Peter Alfred Valentine
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
26 June 2006
Procedural Posture
Chancery Division Civil Claim / Post Liability Trial, Application for Summary Judgment/strike Out and Permission to Amend Pleadings
Outcome
Defences under ss.2 and 18 Competition Act 1998 summarily dismissed; injunction granted; inquiry as to damages ordered; permission to amend particulars of claim granted; no declaration as to implied term granted.
Legal Topics
Beer Tie Agreements, Exclusive Purchasing Obligations, Competition Act 1998 Ss.2 and 18, Implied Terms in Leases, Summary Judgment, Injunctions
Competition Law Landlord and Tenant Law Contract Law Beer Tie Agreements Exclusive Purchasing Obligations Competition Act 1998 Ss.2 and 18 Implied Terms in Leases Summary Judgment +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

P & S Amusements Limited

Claimant

Valley House Leisure Limited

First Defendant

Peter Alfred Valentine

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Chancery Division Civil Claim / Post Liability Trial, Application for Summary Judgment/strike Out and Permission to Amend Pleadings

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the tenant's competition law defences under ss.2 and 18 of the Competition Act 1998 have a real prospect of success
  2. 2 Whether the landlord should be permitted to amend its particulars of claim to allege an implied term prohibiting the tenant from negotiating discounts with the nominated supplier
  3. 3 Whether a declaration should be granted as to the implication of such a term

Ratio Decidendi

The tenant's competition law defences under ss.2 and 18 of the Competition Act 1998 are summarily dismissed as they are inadequately pleaded, unsupported by primary facts, and there is no real prospect of establishing that the beer tie appreciably restricts competition or involves abuse of a dominant position. The landlord is permitted to amend its claim to allege an implied term regarding negotiation of discounts, but no summary declaration is granted as to the implication of such a term.

Court Disposition

Defences under ss.2 and 18 Competition Act 1998 summarily dismissed; injunction granted; inquiry as to damages ordered; permission to amend particulars of claim granted; no declaration as to implied term granted.

Orders

  • Defences under ss.2 and 18 Competition Act 1998 struck out/summarily dismissed
  • Injunction granted restraining tenant from purchasing designated beers except from nominated supplier