Cotton (t/a Allmat Enterprises) v Rickard Metals Inc [2008] EWHC 824 (QB) (21 April 2008)
The evidence before the court was not sufficiently clear-cut to justify summary judgment; there were unresolved factual disputes and new evidence that could support the Defendant's case, so the Defendant had a real prospect of success and the matter should proceed to trial.
- Citation
- [2008] EWHC 824
- Parties
- Appellant/defendant: Daniel Charles Cotton (Trading as Allmat Enterprises); Respondent/claimant: Rickard Metals Inc
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 21 April 2008
- Procedural Posture
- Appeal / Appeal Against Summary Judgment Order
- Outcome
- Appeal allowed; summary judgment set aside
- Legal Topics
- Summary Judgment, Sale of Goods, Implied Terms, Evidence Admissibility
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Daniel Charles Cotton (Trading as Allmat Enterprises)
Appellant/defendant
Rickard Metals Inc
Respondent/claimant
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Appeal Against Summary Judgment Order
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether summary judgment was appropriate on the issue of non-compliance with contractual description under s.13 Sale of Goods Act 1979
- 2 Whether new evidence should be admitted on appeal
- 3 Whether the evidence established that the titanium supplied did not correspond with contractual description
Ratio Decidendi
The evidence before the court was not sufficiently clear-cut to justify summary judgment; there were unresolved factual disputes and new evidence that could support the Defendant's case, so the Defendant had a real prospect of success and the matter should proceed to trial.
Court Disposition
Appeal allowed; summary judgment set aside
Orders
- Order for summary judgment set aside
- Matter to proceed to trial
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment