TG Can Ltd v Crown Packaging UK Plc [2007] EWHC 1271 (QB) (18 May 2007)

TG Can Ltd v Crown Packaging UK Plc [2007] EWHC 1271 (QB) (18 May 2007)

The amendments to plead implied terms were not arguable as the contract was effective without them, did not confer relevant discretion, and the pleaded terms contradicted the express terms. The contract treated TGC and Sandvik as a single supplier, and there was no basis for implying a duty of even-handedness or good faith. The claim in contract was dismissed as there was no real prospect of success.

Citation
[2007] EWHC 1271
Parties
Claimant: TG Can Limited; Defendant: Crown Packaging UK PLC
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
18 May 2007
Procedural Posture
Commercial Contract Dispute / Interlocutory Judgment on Amendments, Strike Out, and Summary Judgment
Outcome
Claim dismissed; summary judgment for defendant; amendments and strike out applications determined as set out in judgment.
Legal Topics
Implied Terms, Summary Judgment, Construction of Contracts, Strike Out Applications, Amendment of Pleadings
Contract Law Commercial Law Implied Terms Summary Judgment Construction of Contracts Strike Out Applications Amendment of Pleadings

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 4 Authorities cited 10 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

TG Can Limited

Claimant

Crown Packaging UK PLC

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Contract Dispute / Interlocutory Judgment on Amendments, Strike Out, and Summary Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimant should have permission to re-amend the Particulars of Claim
  2. 2 Whether certain passages in the pre-re-amended Particulars of Claim should be struck out
  3. 3 Whether summary judgment should be entered for the defendant on the principal claim in contract

Ratio Decidendi

The amendments to plead implied terms were not arguable as the contract was effective without them, did not confer relevant discretion, and the pleaded terms contradicted the express terms. The contract treated TGC and Sandvik as a single supplier, and there was no basis for implying a duty of even-handedness or good faith. The claim in contract was dismissed as there was no real prospect of success.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed; summary judgment for defendant; amendments and strike out applications determined as set out in judgment.

Orders

  • Amendments to paragraph 15 of the Particulars of Claim refused and struck out.
  • Amendments to paragraph 18 refused and struck out.