MCI Worldcom International Inc v Primus Telecommunications Inc

MCI Worldcom International Inc v Primus Telecommunications Inc

The defendant has no real prospect of success on any pleaded ground. The alleged misrepresentations were not actionable as they were not made by a person with actual or apparent authority, nor were they material or relied upon as representations of fact. The agreements were not void or voidable for mistake or misrepresentation, and the counterclaim for damages under section 2(1) of the Misrepresentation Act 1967 fails as there was no actionable misrepresentation attributable to the claimant. The claimant is entitled to summary judgment for the sums claimed.

Parties
Claimant: MCI Worldcom International Inc; Defendant: Primus Telecommunications Inc
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
25 September 2003
Procedural Posture
Commercial Claim (summary Judgment and Counterclaim) / High Court Judgment on Summary Judgment Application and Permission to Amend Defence/counterclaim
Outcome
Judgment for the claimant
Legal Topics
Misrepresentation, Rescission, Damages, Agency, Rectification, Mistake, Summary Judgment
Contract Law Commercial Law Misrepresentation Rescission Damages Agency Rectification Mistake +1 more

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 4 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

MCI Worldcom International Inc

Claimant

Primus Telecommunications Inc

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Claim (summary Judgment and Counterclaim) / High Court Judgment on Summary Judgment Application and Permission to Amend Defence/counterclaim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the defendant has a real prospect of success in its defence and counterclaim based on alleged misrepresentations, mistake, and breach of contract
  2. 2 Whether the claimant is entitled to summary judgment for the sums claimed under the agreements
  3. 3 Whether the defendant is entitled to rescind the agreements or claim damages for misrepresentation or mistake

Ratio Decidendi

The defendant has no real prospect of success on any pleaded ground. The alleged misrepresentations were not actionable as they were not made by a person with actual or apparent authority, nor were they material or relied upon as representations of fact. The agreements were not void or voidable for mistake or misrepresentation, and the counterclaim for damages under section 2(1) of the Misrepresentation Act 1967 fails as there was no actionable misrepresentation attributable to the claimant. The claimant is entitled to summary judgment for the sums claimed.

Court Disposition

Judgment for the claimant

Orders

  • Summary judgment for the claimant in the sum claimed (£1,592,614.62 plus interest)
  • Defendant's application for permission to amend defence and counterclaim dismissed