Spreadex Ltd v Cochrane [2012] EWHC 1290 (Comm) (18 May 2012)

Spreadex Ltd v Cochrane [2012] EWHC 1290 (Comm) (18 May 2012)

Clause 10(3) of the Customer Agreement is not contractually binding as there is no pre-existing contract supported by consideration, and even if it were, the clause is unfair under the UTCCR as it creates a significant imbalance in rights and obligations and is contrary to good faith. Clause 13(5) does not apply to online trades and does not provide an alternative basis for the claimant's recovery.

Citation
[2012] EWHC 1290 (Comm)
Parties
Claimant: Spreadex Ltd; Defendant: Defendant (unnamed)
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
18 May 2012
Procedural Posture
Civil / Summary Judgment Application
Outcome
summary judgment refused
Legal Topics
Unfair Contract Terms, Online Contracts, Summary Judgment, Consumer Rights
Contract Law Consumer Protection Unfair Contract Terms Online Contracts Summary Judgment Consumer Rights

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

Parties

Spreadex Ltd

Claimant

Defendant (unnamed)

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil / Summary Judgment Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Clause 10(3) of the Customer Agreement is contractually binding and enforceable against the defendant for unauthorised trades
  2. 2 Whether Clause 10(3) is an unfair term under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999 (UTCCR)
  3. 3 Whether Clause 13(5) provides an alternative basis for the claimant's recovery

Ratio Decidendi

Clause 10(3) of the Customer Agreement is not contractually binding as there is no pre-existing contract supported by consideration, and even if it were, the clause is unfair under the UTCCR as it creates a significant imbalance in rights and obligations and is contrary to good faith. Clause 13(5) does not apply to online trades and does not provide an alternative basis for the claimant's recovery.

Court Disposition

summary judgment refused

Orders

  • Summary judgment for the claimant is refused.
  • Declaration that the claimant cannot recover except for trades effected by the defendant or with his actual or ostensible authority.