Brand Studio Ltd v St John Knits, Inc

Brand Studio Ltd v St John Knits, Inc

Severance of the invalid proviso in clause 6.3(a) is permissible under common law rules, leaving a valid concession by the agent to accept an indemnity rather than compensation. The contract remains the sort of contract the parties entered into, so the agency contract 'otherwise provides' for indemnity under Regulation 17.

Parties
Claimant: Brand Studio Limited; Defendant: St John Knits, Inc
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
02 November 2015
Procedural Posture
Commercial Agency Dispute / Trial of Preliminary Issue
Outcome
Claimant not entitled to compensation; agency contract validly provides for indemnity.
Legal Topics
Agency Termination, Compensation Vs Indemnity, Contract Severance
Commercial Law Contract Law Agency Termination Compensation Vs Indemnity Contract Severance

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 2 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Brand Studio Limited

Claimant

St John Knits, Inc

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Agency Dispute / Trial of Preliminary Issue

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Claimant is entitled to compensation (as opposed to indemnity) under clause 6.3(a) of the EU Agency Agreement and Regulation 17 of the Commercial Agents (Council Directive) Regulations 1993

Ratio Decidendi

Severance of the invalid proviso in clause 6.3(a) is permissible under common law rules, leaving a valid concession by the agent to accept an indemnity rather than compensation. The contract remains the sort of contract the parties entered into, so the agency contract 'otherwise provides' for indemnity under Regulation 17.

Court Disposition

Claimant not entitled to compensation; agency contract validly provides for indemnity.

Orders

  • Answer to the preliminary issue: No