Gregg & Co. (Knottingley) Ltd. & Anor v Emhart Glass Ltd. [2005] EWHC 804 (TCC) (20 April 2005)

Gregg & Co. (Knottingley) Ltd. & Anor v Emhart Glass Ltd. [2005] EWHC 804 (TCC) (20 April 2005)

There was a single contract for the supply, installation, and commissioning of all six inspection machines, concluded orally on 2 July 1999 and confirmed in writing. No standard terms of either party were incorporated into the contract. The contract was governed by implied terms as to satisfactory quality and fitness for purpose under the Sale of Goods Act 1979 and as to reasonable skill and care in services under the Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982. The exclusion and limitation clauses were not incorporated and did not apply.

Citation
[2005] EWHC 804 (TCC)
Parties
Part 20 Claimant: Gregg & Co. (Knottingley) Limited; Part 20 Claimant: Allied Glass Containers Limited; Part 20 Defendant: Emhart Glass Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
20 April 2005
Procedural Posture
Part 20 Claim (counterclaim) in Commercial Contract Dispute / First Trial on Liability Only; Causation and Quantum Reserved for Later Trial
Outcome
Liability judgment on issues of contract formation and terms; no final determination of damages or causation at this stage.
Legal Topics
Implied Terms, Incorporation of Terms, Exclusion Clauses, Fitness for Purpose, Satisfactory Quality, Duty of Care, Assignment of Contract, Limitation of Liability
Commercial Law Contract Law Sale of Goods Product Liability Implied Terms Incorporation of Terms Exclusion Clauses Fitness for Purpose +4 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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Gregg & Co. (Knottingley) Limited

Part 20 Claimant

Allied Glass Containers Limited

Part 20 Claimant

Emhart Glass Limited

Part 20 Defendant

Procedural Posture

Part 20 Claim (counterclaim) in Commercial Contract Dispute / First Trial on Liability Only; Causation and Quantum Reserved for Later Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there was one contract or multiple contracts for the supply and installation of inspection machines
  2. 2 Whether any party's standard terms were incorporated into the contract(s)
  3. 3 What express and implied terms governed the contract(s)

Ratio Decidendi

There was a single contract for the supply, installation, and commissioning of all six inspection machines, concluded orally on 2 July 1999 and confirmed in writing. No standard terms of either party were incorporated into the contract. The contract was governed by implied terms as to satisfactory quality and fitness for purpose under the Sale of Goods Act 1979 and as to reasonable skill and care in services under the Supply of Goods and Services Act 1982. The exclusion and limitation clauses were not incorporated and did not apply.

Court Disposition

Liability judgment on issues of contract formation and terms; no final determination of damages or causation at this stage.

Orders

  • Declaration that there was a single contract for the supply, installation, and commissioning of all six machines.
  • Declaration that no standard terms of either party were incorporated into the contract.