BMIC Ltd v Chinnakannan Sivasankaran Siva Ltd

BMIC Ltd v Chinnakannan Sivasankaran Siva Ltd

No binding collateral contract or estoppel arose from the alleged oral assurances during negotiations. The written settlement agreement is definitive and enforceable. The oral assurances were not intended to be legally binding, were not supported by authority, and did not override the express terms of the written agreements. The claim for payment under the settlement agreement succeeds.

Parties
Claimant: BMIC Limited; First Defendant: Chinnakannan Sivasankaran; Second Defendant: Siva Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
12 June 2014
Procedural Posture
Commercial Claim / Judgment After Trial
Outcome
Claim allowed
Legal Topics
Collateral Contract, Promissory Estoppel, Entire Agreement Clauses, Authority of Agents, Settlement Agreements
Contract Law Commercial Law Collateral Contract Promissory Estoppel Entire Agreement Clauses Authority of Agents Settlement Agreements

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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

BMIC Limited

Claimant

Chinnakannan Sivasankaran

First Defendant

Siva Limited

Second Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Claim / Judgment After Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether oral assurances given during pre-contract negotiations created collateral agreements or estoppel overriding the written settlement agreement
  2. 2 Whether the claimant is entitled to enforce the settlement agreement for payment of US$184,793,000 plus US$30,000 per day from 1 November 2012

Ratio Decidendi

No binding collateral contract or estoppel arose from the alleged oral assurances during negotiations. The written settlement agreement is definitive and enforceable. The oral assurances were not intended to be legally binding, were not supported by authority, and did not override the express terms of the written agreements. The claim for payment under the settlement agreement succeeds.

Court Disposition

Claim allowed

Orders

  • Defendants to pay BMIC US$184,793,000 plus US$30,000 per day from 1 November 2012, pursuant to the settlement agreement