Axa Sun Life Services Plc v Cannon & anor [2007] EWHC 2466 (QB) (30 October 2007)

Axa Sun Life Services Plc v Cannon & anor [2007] EWHC 2466 (QB) (30 October 2007)

The court found that any representations made by AXA's representatives regarding the availability of Mr Kipping's client base were true statements of intention and expectation at the time, not false statements of fact or actionable warranties. There was no evidence that AXA was responsible for the failure to secure Mr Kipping's approval as an Introducer, nor was there any promise or implied term breached by AXA. The defendants' counterclaim and set off failed on the facts, and AXA's claim for repayment of the Development Allowance succeeded.

Citation
[2007] EWHC 2466
Parties
Claimant: AXA Sun Life Services Plc; Defendant: Michael Cannon; Defendant: David Piper
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
30 October 2007
Procedural Posture
Commercial Contract Claim / Trial Judgment
Outcome
Claim allowed; counterclaim and set off dismissed
Legal Topics
Misrepresentation, Implied Terms, Entire Agreement Clause, Disclosure Obligations, Counterclaim and Set Off
Contract Law Commercial Law Misrepresentation Implied Terms Entire Agreement Clause Disclosure Obligations Counterclaim and Set Off

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

Parties

AXA Sun Life Services Plc

Claimant

Michael Cannon

Defendant

David Piper

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Contract Claim / Trial Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether AXA made actionable misrepresentations to the defendants regarding the availability of Mr Kipping's client base
  2. 2 Whether there was a breach of contract or implied term by AXA in failing to ensure the availability of Mr Kipping's clients to the defendants
  3. 3 Whether the entire agreement clause precluded liability for misrepresentation or implied terms

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that any representations made by AXA's representatives regarding the availability of Mr Kipping's client base were true statements of intention and expectation at the time, not false statements of fact or actionable warranties. There was no evidence that AXA was responsible for the failure to secure Mr Kipping's approval as an Introducer, nor was there any promise or implied term breached by AXA. The defendants' counterclaim and set off failed on the facts, and AXA's claim for repayment of the Development Allowance succeeded.

Court Disposition

Claim allowed; counterclaim and set off dismissed

Orders

  • Defendants to repay the Development Allowance to AXA, subject to agreed adjustments
  • Counterclaim and set off dismissed