Cantor Fitzgerald International v Callaghan & Ors [1999] EWCA Civ 622 (21 January 1999)

Cantor Fitzgerald International v Callaghan & Ors [1999] EWCA Civ 622 (21 January 1999)

The plaintiff/respondent was in repudiatory breach of contract by undertaking that there was no additional tax liability upon the defendants/appellants when withholding £40,000 for tax purposes. This entitled the defendants/appellants to damages and discharge of undertakings. Costs of the appeal were awarded to the defendants/appellants, but only 50% of their costs below, reflecting the conduct of the litigation.

Citation
[1999] EWCA Civ 622
Parties
Plaintiff/respondent: Cantor Fitzgerald International; Defendant/appellant: Lee Callaghan; Defendant/appellant: Kevin Chandler; Defendant/appellant: Michael Gomez; Defendant/appellant: Robert Shallis; Defendant/appellant: Sean Talbot
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
21 January 1999
Procedural Posture
Appeal (civil) / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From High Court, Queen's Bench Division
Outcome
Appeal allowed. Order of the High Court set aside. Case remitted for assessment of damages. Undertakings discharged. Leave to appeal refused.
Legal Topics
Repudiatory Breach of Contract, Employment Contract, Damages Assessment, Restrictive Covenants, Costs Orders
Employment Law Contract Law Repudiatory Breach of Contract Employment Contract Damages Assessment Restrictive Covenants Costs Orders

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

Parties

Cantor Fitzgerald International

Plaintiff/respondent

Lee Callaghan

Defendant/appellant

Kevin Chandler

Defendant/appellant

Michael Gomez

Defendant/appellant

Robert Shallis

Defendant/appellant

Sean Talbot

Defendant/appellant

Procedural Posture

Appeal (civil) / Court of Appeal Judgment on Appeal From High Court, Queen's Bench Division

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the plaintiff/respondent was in repudiatory breach of contract by undertaking that there was no additional tax liability upon the defendants/appellants when withholding £40,000 for tax purposes
  2. 2 Whether such breach entitled the defendants/appellants to damages
  3. 3 Whether the undertakings given by the defendants/appellants should be discharged

Ratio Decidendi

The plaintiff/respondent was in repudiatory breach of contract by undertaking that there was no additional tax liability upon the defendants/appellants when withholding £40,000 for tax purposes. This entitled the defendants/appellants to damages and discharge of undertakings. Costs of the appeal were awarded to the defendants/appellants, but only 50% of their costs below, reflecting the conduct of the litigation.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed. Order of the High Court set aside. Case remitted for assessment of damages. Undertakings discharged. Leave to appeal refused.

Orders

  • Appeal allowed on the ground of repudiatory breach by plaintiff/respondent.
  • Order of Mr Justice Popplewell set aside.