Racing UK Ltd v Doncaster Racecourse Ltd & Anor [2005] EWCA Civ 999 (20 July 2005)

Racing UK Ltd v Doncaster Racecourse Ltd & Anor [2005] EWCA Civ 999 (20 July 2005)

The Metropolitan Borough Council was bound by the agreement because Mr Sanderson/DRL had ostensible authority to act on its behalf, the Council held them out as such, and Racing UK relied on that representation. The objective intention was to contract with the owner of the racecourse, i.e., the Council, not DRL as principal.

Citation
[2005] EWCA Civ 999
Parties
Claimant/1st Respondent: Racing UK Limited; 1st Defendant/2nd Respondent: Doncaster Racecourse Limited; 2nd Defendant/appellant: Doncaster Metropolitan District Council
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
20 July 2005
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court (queen's Bench Division) to Court of Appeal
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Ostensible Authority, Agency by Representation, Binding Effect of Contracts, Interpretation of Agreements, Undisclosed Principal
Contract Law Agency Law Ostensible Authority Agency by Representation Binding Effect of Contracts Interpretation of Agreements Undisclosed Principal

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Racing UK Limited

Claimant/1st Respondent

Doncaster Racecourse Limited

1st Defendant/2nd Respondent

Doncaster Metropolitan District Council

2nd Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From High Court (queen's Bench Division) to Court of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council was bound by an agreement signed by Mr Sanderson/DRL with Racing UK Limited
  2. 2 Whether Mr Sanderson/DRL had ostensible authority to bind the Council
  3. 3 Whether Racing UK intended to contract with DRL as principal or with the Council

Ratio Decidendi

The Metropolitan Borough Council was bound by the agreement because Mr Sanderson/DRL had ostensible authority to act on its behalf, the Council held them out as such, and Racing UK relied on that representation. The objective intention was to contract with the owner of the racecourse, i.e., the Council, not DRL as principal.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appellants to pay respondents' costs
  • Parties to agree quantum of costs