BAE Systems Management Service (Two) Ltd & Anor v AS Enimex [2010] EWCA Civ 107 (28 January 2010)

BAE Systems Management Service (Two) Ltd & Anor v AS Enimex [2010] EWCA Civ 107 (28 January 2010)

The grounds of appeal had no real prospect of success because the arguments advanced by Enimex were either not open at the damages assessment stage, were not supported by the Registrar's findings, or were unsound in law. The Registrar's discretion on interest and evidentiary weight was properly exercised.

Citation
[2010] EWCA Civ 107
Parties
Claimant/respondent: BAE Systems Management Service (Two) Ltd; Claimant/respondent: Trident Aviation Leasing Services (Jersey) Ltd; Defendant/appellant: AS Enimex
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
28 January 2010
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Renewed Application for Permission to Appeal With Appeal to Follow If Granted
Outcome
Permission to appeal refused
Legal Topics
Breach of Contract, Damages Assessment, Lease Agreements, Mitigation of Loss, Interest on Damages
Contract Law Commercial Law Breach of Contract Damages Assessment Lease Agreements Mitigation of Loss Interest on Damages

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 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

BAE Systems Management Service (Two) Ltd

Claimant/respondent

Trident Aviation Leasing Services (Jersey) Ltd

Claimant/respondent

AS Enimex

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Renewed Application for Permission to Appeal With Appeal to Follow If Granted

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Registrar erred in rejecting the argument that damages should be reduced due to alleged complicity of BAE in the breach
  2. 2 Whether the Registrar erred in awarding interest at 8% instead of the contractual rate
  3. 3 Whether the Registrar erred in attaching little weight to late evidence

Ratio Decidendi

The grounds of appeal had no real prospect of success because the arguments advanced by Enimex were either not open at the damages assessment stage, were not supported by the Registrar's findings, or were unsound in law. The Registrar's discretion on interest and evidentiary weight was properly exercised.

Court Disposition

Permission to appeal refused

Orders

  • Application for permission to appeal refused