Malcolm v University Of Oxford Chancellor, Masters & Scholars [2002] EWCA Civ 331 (1 March 2002)

Malcolm v University Of Oxford Chancellor, Masters & Scholars [2002] EWCA Civ 331 (1 March 2002)

Dr Ryan was not acting as a servant or agent of the University when he published the letter; therefore, the University was not in breach of the consent order. The consent order does not extend to individuals acting in a private capacity, and the terms 'servant' and 'agent' must be construed in their ordinary legal sense and in the context of the order.

Citation
[2002] EWCA Civ 331
Parties
Claimant/applicant: Andrew Malcolm; Defendant/respondent: The Chancellor, Masters and Scholars of the University of Oxford
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
01 March 2002
Procedural Posture
Application for Permission to Appeal (civil) / Court of Appeal, Post Summary Judgment
Outcome
Permission to appeal refused
Legal Topics
Interpretation of Consent Orders, Breach of Contract, Academic Freedom, Summary Judgment, Agency and Employment Relationships
Contract Law Civil Procedure Interpretation of Consent Orders Breach of Contract Academic Freedom Summary Judgment Agency and Employment Relationships

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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Andrew Malcolm

Claimant/applicant

The Chancellor, Masters and Scholars of the University of Oxford

Defendant/respondent

Procedural Posture

Application for Permission to Appeal (civil) / Court of Appeal, Post Summary Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the publication of a letter by Dr Ryan constituted a breach of paragraph 7 of the 1992 consent order
  2. 2 Whether Dr Ryan was acting as a 'servant' or 'agent' of the University when publishing the letter
  3. 3 Proper construction of the terms 'servant' and 'agent' in the consent order

Ratio Decidendi

Dr Ryan was not acting as a servant or agent of the University when he published the letter; therefore, the University was not in breach of the consent order. The consent order does not extend to individuals acting in a private capacity, and the terms 'servant' and 'agent' must be construed in their ordinary legal sense and in the context of the order.

Court Disposition

Permission to appeal refused

Orders

  • Application for permission to appeal refused