The Football League Ltd v Edge Ellison (a firm)

The Football League Ltd v Edge Ellison (a firm)

Edge Ellison did not owe an implied duty to The Football League Limited to advise or prompt regarding the need for parent company guarantees for ONdigital's obligations, given the commercial experience of the Committee and the express terms of the retainer. Even if such a duty existed, causation was not established as the Football League would not have insisted on guarantees at the relevant time, and Carlton and Granada would not have provided them if requested. Any breach of duty by Edge Ellison in failing to raise the guarantee issue at the time of the short form agreement or during the long form negotiations did not cause substantial loss, entitling the claimant only to nominal damages.

Parties
Claimant: The Football League Limited; Defendant/part 20 Claimant: Edge Ellison (A Firm); Part 20 Defendant: Active Rights Management Limited; Part 20 Defendant: Clive Stephen Townley
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
23 June 2006
Procedural Posture
Civil / Judgment After Full Trial
Outcome
Claim dismissed except for nominal damages; Part 20 claim dismissed.
Legal Topics
Solicitor's Duty of Care, Implied Terms of Retainer, Causation in Negligence, Damages, Contributory Negligence
Professional Negligence Contract Law Solicitor's Duty of Care Implied Terms of Retainer Causation in Negligence Damages Contributory Negligence

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 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 9
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Football League Limited

Claimant

Edge Ellison (A Firm)

Defendant/part 20 Claimant

Active Rights Management Limited

Part 20 Defendant

Clive Stephen Townley

Part 20 Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Judgment After Full Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Did Edge Ellison owe a duty to The Football League Limited to obtain instructions regarding parent company guarantees for ONdigital's obligations?
  2. 2 If such a duty existed, would the Football League have instructed to seek guarantees?
  3. 3 Would Carlton and Granada have provided guarantees if requested?

Ratio Decidendi

Edge Ellison did not owe an implied duty to The Football League Limited to advise or prompt regarding the need for parent company guarantees for ONdigital's obligations, given the commercial experience of the Committee and the express terms of the retainer. Even if such a duty existed, causation was not established as the Football League would not have insisted on guarantees at the relevant time, and Carlton and Granada would not have provided them if requested. Any breach of duty by Edge Ellison in failing to raise the guarantee issue at the time of the short form agreement or during the long form negotiations did not cause substantial loss, entitling the claimant only to nominal damages.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed except for nominal damages; Part 20 claim dismissed.

Orders

  • The Football League Limited's claim against Edge Ellison is dismissed except for nominal damages of £2 for each of two breaches.
  • Edge Ellison's Part 20 claim against Active Rights Management Limited and Clive Stephen Townley is dismissed.