EE Limited v Virgin Mobile Telecoms Limited

EE Limited v Virgin Mobile Telecoms Limited

The appeal does not have a real prospect of success because the judge correctly interpreted the TSA contract and clause 34.5(a) according to its plain and natural meaning, and the breach sounded in damages for loss of profits.

Parties
Claimant: EE Limited; Respondent: Virgin Mobile Telecoms Limited
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
02 May 2026
Procedural Posture
Commercial Contract Dispute / Ruling on Permission to Appeal
Outcome
permission to appeal refused
Legal Topics
Interpretation of Contract Clauses, Damages for Breach of Contract, Permission to Appeal
Contract Law Interpretation of Contract Clauses Damages for Breach of Contract Permission to Appeal

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 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

EE Limited

Claimant

Virgin Mobile Telecoms Limited

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Commercial Contract Dispute / Ruling on Permission to Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the judge misunderstood the TSA contract
  2. 2 Whether clause 34.5(a) should be construed differently from its natural and ordinary meaning

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal does not have a real prospect of success because the judge correctly interpreted the TSA contract and clause 34.5(a) according to its plain and natural meaning, and the breach sounded in damages for loss of profits.

Court Disposition

permission to appeal refused

Orders

  • If the claimant wishes to pursue an appeal, it must seek permission from the Court of Appeal