Barclay Pharmaceuticals Ltd v OPD Laboratories Ltd & Ors

Barclay Pharmaceuticals Ltd v OPD Laboratories Ltd & Ors

There was a contract between Trident Pharmaceuticals and OPD Laboratories. OPD Laboratories breached warranty by repackaging some products without the required licences. However, it is arguable that some products were for AAH and that liability for products not yet delivered is not clear. The main ground of defence is improbable but not wholly unarguable, so only conditional leave to defend is granted, subject to a payment into court.

Parties
Claimant: Barclay Pharmaceuticals Limited; Defendant: OPD Laboratories Limited; Third Party: Collin Turrell; Third Party: Paul Longland
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
18 June 2014
Procedural Posture
Civil / Application for Summary Judgment and Strike Out of Defence
Outcome
Conditional leave to defend granted to OPD Laboratories, subject to payment into court.
Legal Topics
Breach of Warranty, Indemnity Clauses, Summary Judgment, Strike Out Applications
Contract Law Commercial Law Breach of Warranty Indemnity Clauses Summary Judgment Strike Out Applications

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 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Barclay Pharmaceuticals Limited

Claimant

OPD Laboratories Limited

Defendant

Collin Turrell

Third Party

Paul Longland

Third Party

Procedural Posture

Civil / Application for Summary Judgment and Strike Out of Defence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether there was a contract between Trident Pharmaceuticals and OPD Laboratories
  2. 2 Whether OPD Laboratories breached warranty by repackaging without relevant licences
  3. 3 Whether OPD Laboratories is liable for losses relating to products not yet delivered

Ratio Decidendi

There was a contract between Trident Pharmaceuticals and OPD Laboratories. OPD Laboratories breached warranty by repackaging some products without the required licences. However, it is arguable that some products were for AAH and that liability for products not yet delivered is not clear. The main ground of defence is improbable but not wholly unarguable, so only conditional leave to defend is granted, subject to a payment into court.

Court Disposition

Conditional leave to defend granted to OPD Laboratories, subject to payment into court.

Orders

  • OPD Laboratories to pay £360,000 into court by 4 pm on Friday 11 July 2014 as a condition of leave to defend.
  • Parties to attempt to agree a form of order reflecting the judgment; failing agreement, further submissions to be heard.