Instrument Product Development Ltd v W D Engineering Solutions Ltd [2022] EWHC 1994 (Ch) (26 July 2022)

Instrument Product Development Ltd v W D Engineering Solutions Ltd [2022] EWHC 1994 (Ch) (26 July 2022)

The original oral agreement between IPD and WDES, as formed on 6 March 2017, was limited to the Cannes Nespresso pilot store. Subsequent orders for Madison, Washington, Mexico, Portugal, the UK, and Lausanne were added by specific variations agreed between the parties. There was no agreement, express or implied, that the profit share arrangement extended to the entire Nespresso rollout. The evidence, including contemporaneous emails and conduct, did not support IPD's claim to a profit share in the wider project.

Citation
[2022] EWHC 1994 (Ch)
Parties
Claimant: Instrument Product Development Ltd; Defendant: WD Engineering Solutions Ltd
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
26 July 2022
Procedural Posture
Commercial Contract Dispute / High Court Trial Judgment
Outcome
Claim dismissed
Legal Topics
Interpretation of Oral Contracts, Variation of Contract, Profit Sharing Agreements, Joint Venture Arrangements, Reliability of Witness Memory

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 3 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Instrument Product Development Ltd

Claimant

WD Engineering Solutions Ltd

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Commercial Contract Dispute / High Court Trial Judgment

  1. 1 Whether the oral agreement between IPD and WDES covered only the Cannes Nespresso pilot or the wider Nespresso rollout
  2. 2 Whether subsequent conduct and variations extended the agreement to further stores
  3. 3 Whether IPD was entitled to a profit share from the wider Nespresso project

Ratio Decidendi

The original oral agreement between IPD and WDES, as formed on 6 March 2017, was limited to the Cannes Nespresso pilot store. Subsequent orders for Madison, Washington, Mexico, Portugal, the UK, and Lausanne were added by specific variations agreed between the parties. There was no agreement, express or implied, that the profit share arrangement extended to the entire Nespresso rollout. The evidence, including contemporaneous emails and conduct, did not support IPD's claim to a profit share in the wider project.

Court Disposition

Claim dismissed

Orders

  • Claimant's claim for profit share in the wider Nespresso rollout is dismissed.
  • No order for profit share beyond the specifically agreed pilot stores.