P & S Amusements Ltd v Valley House Leisure Ltd & Anor [2006] EWHC 99 (Ch) (02 February 2006)

P & S Amusements Ltd v Valley House Leisure Ltd & Anor [2006] EWHC 99 (Ch) (02 February 2006)

The tenant is contractually bound by the beer tie provision and has breached it by not purchasing from the landlord's nominated supplier since the nomination of Carlsberg-Tetley. The landlord is not accountable to the tenant for discounts received from the brewery, as no fiduciary relationship exists. Damages for alleged pre-2002 breaches (Budweiser purchases) are not ordered due to insufficient evidence. Injunctive relief and damages inquiry are deferred pending resolution of competition law issues.

Citation
[2006] EWHC 99 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant/part 20 Defendant: P & S Amusements Limited; Defendant/part 20 Claimant: Valley House Leisure Limited; Defendant/part 20 Claimant: Peter Alfred Valentine
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
02 February 2006
Procedural Posture
Chancery Division Commercial Lease Dispute / Split Trial on Liability (excluding Competition Law and Quantum)
Outcome
Claimant succeeds in establishing breach of beer tie provision; counterclaim dismissed (subject to competition law issues); no order for damages inquiry on Budweiser purchases; injunctive relief and damages inquiry deferred.
Legal Topics
Beer Tie Provisions, Lease Interpretation, Fiduciary Duties, Nomination of Supplier, Breach of Contract, Counterclaim for Account of Profits
Landlord and Tenant Contract Law Commercial Law Beer Tie Provisions Lease Interpretation Fiduciary Duties Nomination of Supplier Breach of Contract +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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

P & S Amusements Limited

Claimant/part 20 Defendant

Valley House Leisure Limited

Defendant/part 20 Claimant

Peter Alfred Valentine

Defendant/part 20 Claimant

Procedural Posture

Chancery Division Commercial Lease Dispute / Split Trial on Liability (excluding Competition Law and Quantum)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Is the tenant bound by the beer tie provision in the lease (excluding competition law)?
  2. 2 Is the landlord accountable to the tenant for discounts received from the brewery?
  3. 3 Is the tenant liable for damages for alleged breaches of the tie by purchasing beer from non-nominated suppliers?

Ratio Decidendi

The tenant is contractually bound by the beer tie provision and has breached it by not purchasing from the landlord's nominated supplier since the nomination of Carlsberg-Tetley. The landlord is not accountable to the tenant for discounts received from the brewery, as no fiduciary relationship exists. Damages for alleged pre-2002 breaches (Budweiser purchases) are not ordered due to insufficient evidence. Injunctive relief and damages inquiry are deferred pending resolution of competition law issues.

Court Disposition

Claimant succeeds in establishing breach of beer tie provision; counterclaim dismissed (subject to competition law issues); no order for damages inquiry on Budweiser purchases; injunctive relief and damages inquiry deferred.

Orders

  • No injunction granted at this stage;
  • Enquiry as to damages for post-nomination period deferred pending competition law trial;