Lapidus v Le Blancq [2013] 2 JLR 308 (16 September 2013)

Lapidus v Le Blancq [2013] 2 JLR 308 (16 September 2013)

A claim for breach of contract is arguable and should not be struck out merely because only nominal damages are likely; the cause of action arises at the time of breach.

Citation
[2013] 2 JLR 308
Parties
Applicant: Lapidus; Respondent: Le Blancq
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
16 September 2013
Procedural Posture
Civil / Strike Out Application
Outcome
claim not struck out
Legal Topics
Breach of Contract, Cause of Action, Nominal Damages
Contract Law Breach of Contract Cause of Action Nominal Damages

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

Lapidus

Applicant

Le Blancq

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil / Strike Out Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 When does a cause of action for breach of contract arise?
  2. 2 Can a claim be struck out if only nominal damages are likely?

Ratio Decidendi

A claim for breach of contract is arguable and should not be struck out merely because only nominal damages are likely; the cause of action arises at the time of breach.

Court Disposition

claim not struck out