Rebellion Interactive Ltd v Square Enix (2009) Ltd [2016] EWHC 2042 (Ch) (27 May 2016)

Rebellion Interactive Ltd v Square Enix (2009) Ltd [2016] EWHC 2042 (Ch) (27 May 2016)

The 4 February 2010 letter was not sufficiently clear to extinguish or waive the claimant's accrued rights to payment for milestones 6-9, nor did it have the draconian effect contended for by the defendant. The factual background and context were disputed and required further investigation at trial. Therefore, the claimant's claims had a real prospect of success and the matter was not suitable for summary judgment.

Citation
[2016] EWHC 2042 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Rebellion Interactive Ltd; Defendant: Square Enix (2009) Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
27 May 2016
Procedural Posture
Commercial Contract Dispute (summary Judgment Application) / Summary Judgment Application Under CPR Part 24.2
Outcome
Defendant's application for summary judgment dismissed
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Interpretation of Contracts, Termination of Contract, Milestone Payments, Video Game Development Agreements
Contract Law Commercial Law Summary Judgment Interpretation of Contracts Termination of Contract Milestone Payments Video Game Development Agreements

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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rebellion Interactive Ltd

Claimant

Square Enix (2009) Ltd

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Contract Dispute (summary Judgment Application) / Summary Judgment Application Under CPR Part 24.2

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the 4 February 2010 letter extinguished claims for milestone payments for milestones 7, 8, and 9
  2. 2 Whether the claimant had a real prospect of success for claims relating to milestones 6-9
  3. 3 Whether the matter was suitable for summary judgment

Ratio Decidendi

The 4 February 2010 letter was not sufficiently clear to extinguish or waive the claimant's accrued rights to payment for milestones 6-9, nor did it have the draconian effect contended for by the defendant. The factual background and context were disputed and required further investigation at trial. Therefore, the claimant's claims had a real prospect of success and the matter was not suitable for summary judgment.

Court Disposition

Defendant's application for summary judgment dismissed

Orders

  • The defendant's application for summary judgment is dismissed.