Sony Computer Entertainment UK Ltd v Cinram Logistics UK Ltd [2008] EWCA Civ 955 (08 August 2008)

Sony Computer Entertainment UK Ltd v Cinram Logistics UK Ltd [2008] EWCA Civ 955 (08 August 2008)

Sony is entitled to recover the discounted sale price of the lost goods as damages because it proved, on the balance of probabilities, that the sales to Game were not replaced. Even if the burden of proof had shifted, Cinram failed to prove that Sony recouped its profit by substitute sales. The evidential burden to show mitigation by replacement sales rested on Cinram, not Sony.

Citation
[2008] EWCA Civ 955
Parties
Claimant/respondent: Sony Computer Entertainment UK Limited; Appellant/defendant: Cinram Logistics UK Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
08 August 2008
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Damages for Loss of Goods, Measure of Damages, Burden of Proof, Mitigation of Loss, Sale of Goods, Bailment, Negligence
Commercial Law Contract Law Tort Law Damages for Loss of Goods Measure of Damages Burden of Proof Mitigation of Loss Sale of Goods +2 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 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Sony Computer Entertainment UK Limited

Claimant/respondent

Cinram Logistics UK Limited

Appellant/defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Sony is entitled to recover the sale price or only the manufacturing cost of lost goods from Cinram
  2. 2 On whom lies the burden of proof regarding replacement sales and mitigation of loss

Ratio Decidendi

Sony is entitled to recover the discounted sale price of the lost goods as damages because it proved, on the balance of probabilities, that the sales to Game were not replaced. Even if the burden of proof had shifted, Cinram failed to prove that Sony recouped its profit by substitute sales. The evidential burden to show mitigation by replacement sales rested on Cinram, not Sony.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Sony is entitled to recover the net value (discounted sale price) of the lost memory cards from Cinram