Curtis & Anor v Lockheed Martin UK Holdings Ltd

Curtis & Anor v Lockheed Martin UK Holdings Ltd

The only breach of warranty was the failure to disclose the Exploitation Agreement, but the Defendant's notification did not comply with contractual requirements, so Claimants are not liable for the warranty claim.

Parties
Claimant: John David Curtis; Claimant: Julian Francis Osborn Ranger; Defendant: Lockheed Martin UK Holdings Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
06 November 2008
Procedural Posture
Commercial / Judgment
Outcome
Claim succeeds, Counterclaim fails
Legal Topics
Share Sale Agreement, Warranty, Disclosure, Notification, Damages
Contract Law Commercial Law Share Sale Agreement Warranty Disclosure Notification Damages

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 5 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

John David Curtis

Claimant

Julian Francis Osborn Ranger

Claimant

Lockheed Martin UK Holdings Limited

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Claimants fairly disclosed all material agreements and facts under the Share Sale Agreement
  2. 2 Whether the Defendant's notification of warranty claim complied with contractual requirements
  3. 3 Whether the omission of the Exploitation Agreement constituted a breach of warranty

Ratio Decidendi

The only breach of warranty was the failure to disclose the Exploitation Agreement, but the Defendant's notification did not comply with contractual requirements, so Claimants are not liable for the warranty claim.

Court Disposition

Claim succeeds, Counterclaim fails

Orders

  • Judgment for the Claimants