Parkingeye Ltd v Somerfield Stores Ltd [2012] EWCA Civ 1338 (17 October 2012)

Parkingeye Ltd v Somerfield Stores Ltd [2012] EWCA Civ 1338 (17 October 2012)

The contract between ParkingEye and Somerfield was not unenforceable for illegality because the intention to use misleading letters was not fixed, was not central to the contract, and the contract was capable of lawful performance. The illegality was incidental and not sufficient to deprive ParkingEye of its contractual remedy for Somerfield's repudiatory breach.

Citation
[2012] EWCA Civ 1338
Parties
Claimant/respondent: ParkingEye Limited; Defendant/appellant: Somerfield Stores Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
17 October 2012
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From Queen's Bench Division, Manchester Mercantile Court
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Illegality in Contract, Repudiatory Breach, Tort of Deceit, Enforceability of Contracts Performed Unlawfully, Public Policy in Contract Law
Contract Law Tort Law Illegality in Contract Repudiatory Breach Tort of Deceit Enforceability of Contracts Performed Unlawfully Public Policy in Contract Law

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 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

ParkingEye Limited

Claimant/respondent

Somerfield Stores Limited

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From Queen's Bench Division, Manchester Mercantile Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a contract is unenforceable due to an intention at the outset to perform part of it unlawfully
  2. 2 Whether the illegality defence applies where the unlawful performance is incidental and not central to the contract
  3. 3 Whether ParkingEye is entitled to damages for Somerfield's repudiatory breach despite the use of misleading letters

Ratio Decidendi

The contract between ParkingEye and Somerfield was not unenforceable for illegality because the intention to use misleading letters was not fixed, was not central to the contract, and the contract was capable of lawful performance. The illegality was incidental and not sufficient to deprive ParkingEye of its contractual remedy for Somerfield's repudiatory breach.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeal by Somerfield Stores Limited is dismissed.
  • The judgment of HHJ Hegarty QC awarding damages to ParkingEye Limited stands.