Burley v Joseph W Burley Partners Ltd & Anor [2002] EWCA Civ 1163 (2 July 2002)

Burley v Joseph W Burley Partners Ltd & Anor [2002] EWCA Civ 1163 (2 July 2002)

The court held that it could not be determined, without a trial, whether the parties intended the 1966 letter to supersede the alleged oral agreement regarding pension entitlement; therefore, the parol evidence rule did not automatically exclude the oral evidence, and summary judgment was inappropriate.

Citation
[2002] EWCA Civ 1163
Parties
Appellant: Kenneth Burley; First Respondent: Joseph W Burley Partners Ltd; Second Respondent: Alan Burley
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
02 July 2002
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal Against Summary Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Parol Evidence Rule, Collateral Contract, Pension Entitlements, Summary Judgment
Contract Law Employment Law Parol Evidence Rule Collateral Contract Pension Entitlements Summary Judgment

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 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Kenneth Burley

Appellant

Joseph W Burley Partners Ltd

First Respondent

Alan Burley

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal Against Summary Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the parol evidence rule excludes evidence of an alleged oral agreement regarding pension entitlement
  2. 2 Whether the alleged oral promise constitutes a collateral contract or survives alongside the written agreement
  3. 3 Whether summary judgment was appropriate given the factual disputes

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that it could not be determined, without a trial, whether the parties intended the 1966 letter to supersede the alleged oral agreement regarding pension entitlement; therefore, the parol evidence rule did not automatically exclude the oral evidence, and summary judgment was inappropriate.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Summary judgment set aside
  • Matter remitted for trial