Instagroup Limited v Northwest Insulations Limited (In Liquidation)

Instagroup Limited v Northwest Insulations Limited (In Liquidation)

On proper construction, the guarantee executed by the second defendant was limited to the Company's obligations for goods supplied on credit under the 2008 Agreement and did not extend to liabilities arising from subsequent or alternative agreements, including the 2013 Agreement. Even if it did, the guarantee was discharged upon the entry into the 2013 Agreement, which replaced the earlier arrangements. The claimant's claim against the second defendant under the guarantee cannot succeed.

Parties
Claimant: InstaGroup Limited; 1st Defendant: Northwest Insulations Limited (in liquidation); 2nd Defendant: Mr David Stansfield
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
14 April 2026
Procedural Posture
Civil (commercial/contract) / Summary Judgment Application (reverse) – Determination of Liability Under Guarantee
Outcome
Application for reverse summary judgment by the second defendant granted; claim against second defendant dismissed as unsustainable.
Legal Topics
Construction of Guarantees, Scope of Continuing Guarantees, Material Variation and Discharge of Guarantor, Summary Judgment Principles
Contract Law Guarantee Law Commercial Law Construction of Guarantees Scope of Continuing Guarantees Material Variation and Discharge of Guarantor Summary Judgment Principles

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 4 Authorities cited 19 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

InstaGroup Limited

Claimant

Northwest Insulations Limited (in liquidation)

1st Defendant

Mr David Stansfield

2nd Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (commercial/contract) / Summary Judgment Application (reverse) – Determination of Liability Under Guarantee

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the personal guarantee executed by the second defendant covers the liabilities claimed by the claimant under subsequent or alternative agreements
  2. 2 Whether the guarantee was discharged by material variation or replacement of the underlying contract

Ratio Decidendi

On proper construction, the guarantee executed by the second defendant was limited to the Company's obligations for goods supplied on credit under the 2008 Agreement and did not extend to liabilities arising from subsequent or alternative agreements, including the 2013 Agreement. Even if it did, the guarantee was discharged upon the entry into the 2013 Agreement, which replaced the earlier arrangements. The claimant's claim against the second defendant under the guarantee cannot succeed.

Court Disposition

Application for reverse summary judgment by the second defendant granted; claim against second defendant dismissed as unsustainable.

Orders

  • Summary judgment entered for the second defendant.
  • Claim against the second defendant under the guarantee dismissed.