The Manchester Ship Canal Company Ltd v The Environment Agency [2017] EWHC 1340 (QB) (07 June 2017)

The Manchester Ship Canal Company Ltd v The Environment Agency [2017] EWHC 1340 (QB) (07 June 2017)

The absence of agreement as to the measurement site under clause 4 of the 1963 Agreement is fatal to the claimant's claim for compensation. The contract required agreement or arbitration at the outset, and the machinery for determining the site was essential, not subsidiary. The court cannot infer an agreement,...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2017] EWHC 1340
Parties
Claimant: The Manchester Ship Canal Company Limited; Defendant: The Environment Agency
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
07 June 2017
Procedural Posture
Civil (contract) / Application for Strike Out And/or Summary Judgment
Outcome
Claim dismissed by summary judgment.
Legal Topics
Interpretation of Contract Terms, Summary Judgment, Strike Out Applications, Compensation Clauses, Arbitration Clauses
Contract Law Interpretation of Contract Terms Summary Judgment Strike Out Applications Compensation Clauses Arbitration Clauses

Source-derived case record

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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Manchester Ship Canal Company Limited

Claimant

The Environment Agency

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Civil (contract) / Application for Strike Out And/or Summary Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the absence of agreement as to the measurement site under clause 4 of the 1963 Agreement precludes the claimant from claiming compensation
  2. 2 Whether the court can infer an agreement as to the site, construe the agreement to allow retrospective agreement, or substitute its own decision or refer the matter to arbitration retrospectively

Ratio Decidendi

The absence of agreement as to the measurement site under clause 4 of the 1963 Agreement is fatal to the claimant's claim for compensation. The contract required agreement or arbitration at the outset, and the machinery for determining the site was essential, not subsidiary. The court cannot infer an agreement, allow retrospective agreement, substitute its own decision, or refer the matter to arbitration retrospectively. The claimant has no real prospect of success and summary judgment is appropriate.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed by summary judgment.

Orders

  • Claim struck out and/or summary judgment granted in favour of the defendant.