HRCKY v Hard Rock Limited and Anor [2019] JCA 123 (02 July 2019)

HRCKY v Hard Rock Limited and Anor [2019] JCA 123 (02 July 2019)

The Royal Court erred in granting summary dismissal of the counter-claim because the factual matrix was not sufficiently established, disclosure was incomplete, and the claims of fraudulent misrepresentation and breach of good faith required trial. Entire agreement clauses do not preclude a claim in dol, which, if established, vitiates the contract and all its terms.

Citation
[2019] JCA 123
Parties
Appellant: HRCKY Limited; Respondent: Hard Rock Limited; Respondent: Hard Rock Café International (STP Inc)
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
02 July 2019
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Summary Dismissal of Counter Claim
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Summary Judgment, Misrepresentation, Fraud (dol), Implied Duty of Good Faith, Entire Agreement Clauses, Contract Nullity, Remedies for Fraud, Disclosure, Pleadings
Contract Law Civil Procedure Summary Judgment Misrepresentation Fraud (dol) Implied Duty of Good Faith Entire Agreement Clauses Contract Nullity +3 more

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

Parties

HRCKY Limited

Appellant

Hard Rock Limited

Respondent

Hard Rock Café International (STP Inc)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Summary Dismissal of Counter Claim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether summary dismissal of the appellant's counter-claim was appropriate
  2. 2 Whether fraudulent misrepresentation (dol) can vitiate a contract despite entire agreement clauses
  3. 3 Whether there is an implied duty of good faith in Jersey contract law

Ratio Decidendi

The Royal Court erred in granting summary dismissal of the counter-claim because the factual matrix was not sufficiently established, disclosure was incomplete, and the claims of fraudulent misrepresentation and breach of good faith required trial. Entire agreement clauses do not preclude a claim in dol, which, if established, vitiates the contract and all its terms.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Decision of the Royal Court dated 1 February 2018 set aside
  • Order for costs of the summary judgment application set aside