Costcutter Supermarkets Group Limited v Ameet Kumar Vaish & Anor

Costcutter Supermarkets Group Limited v Ameet Kumar Vaish & Anor

Clause 19.2 does not exclude or limit the claimant's primary right to recover the price of goods delivered as a debt; it only limits secondary obligations in damages. The judge erred in construing the clause otherwise. The trial judge was entitled to rely on the defendants' spreadsheet as evidence of sums owed, and the burden of proof was properly discharged.

Parties
Claimant/appellant: Costcutter Supermarkets Group Limited; First Defendant/first Respondent: Ameet Kumar Vaish; Second Defendant/second Respondent: Pradeep Kumar Vaish
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 October 2024
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal and Cross Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed; cross-appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
Limitation of Liability Clauses, Construction of Contracts, Debt Claims Vs Damages, Burden of Proof, Admissions in Evidence
Contract Law Commercial Law Limitation of Liability Clauses Construction of Contracts Debt Claims Vs Damages Burden of Proof Admissions in Evidence

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 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Costcutter Supermarkets Group Limited

Claimant/appellant

Ameet Kumar Vaish

First Defendant/first Respondent

Pradeep Kumar Vaish

Second Defendant/second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal and Cross Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether limitation of liability clause (clause 19.2) precludes recovery of debt for goods delivered
  2. 2 Whether the trial judge erred in finding the sums due based on the defendants' spreadsheet
  3. 3 Whether the burden of proof was properly discharged by the claimant

Ratio Decidendi

Clause 19.2 does not exclude or limit the claimant's primary right to recover the price of goods delivered as a debt; it only limits secondary obligations in damages. The judge erred in construing the clause otherwise. The trial judge was entitled to rely on the defendants' spreadsheet as evidence of sums owed, and the burden of proof was properly discharged.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; cross-appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • PV liable to Costcutter under the 2009 contract for £33,616.81 plus interest.
  • AV liable to Costcutter under the 2012 contract for £84,110.78 plus interest.