JML Direct Ltd v Freesat UK Ltd [2009] EWHC 616 (Ch) (26 March 2009)

JML Direct Ltd v Freesat UK Ltd [2009] EWHC 616 (Ch) (26 March 2009)

Freesat did not breach its contractual obligations or the Ofcom Code in allocating EPG numbers to JML's channels. Freesat was entitled to attach no weight to the 'date of agreement' criterion across all genres due to practical difficulties and fairness, and its use of BARB ratings and Freeview presence as evidence for 'viewer convenience and expectations' was not irrational. The Listing Policy provided an objectively justifiable method, and Freesat's discretion was exercised within the permissible contractual and regulatory bounds.

Citation
[2009] EWHC 616 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: JML Direct Ltd; Defendant: Freesat UK Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
26 March 2009
Procedural Posture
Commercial Contract Dispute / Expedited Trial on Liability
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Breach of Contract, Exercise of Contractual Discretion, Electronic Programme Guide (epg) Allocation, Ofcom Code Compliance, Objectively Justifiable Allocation Methods

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

JML Direct Ltd

Claimant

Freesat UK Ltd

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Contract Dispute / Expedited Trial on Liability

  1. 1 Whether Freesat breached its contractual obligations in allocating EPG numbers to JML's shopping channels
  2. 2 Whether Freesat failed to comply with its Listing Policy and the Ofcom Code
  3. 3 Whether Freesat's exercise of discretion was irrational or otherwise objectionable

Ratio Decidendi

Freesat did not breach its contractual obligations or the Ofcom Code in allocating EPG numbers to JML's channels. Freesat was entitled to attach no weight to the 'date of agreement' criterion across all genres due to practical difficulties and fairness, and its use of BARB ratings and Freeview presence as evidence for 'viewer convenience and expectations' was not irrational. The Listing Policy provided an objectively justifiable method, and Freesat's discretion was exercised within the permissible contractual and regulatory bounds.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed

Orders

  • No declarations granted; claim for breach of contract fails