Odyssey Cinemas Ltd v Village Theatres Three Ltd & Anor [2010] NICA 25 (2 June 2010)

Odyssey Cinemas Ltd v Village Theatres Three Ltd & Anor [2010] NICA 25 (2 June 2010)

The respondent's misrepresentation was negligent, not fraudulent; the trial judge was correct in rejecting fraudulent misrepresentation. Damages for misrepresentation and breach of warranty should not be reduced for contributory negligence. Remedy (rescission or damages) must be reconsidered by the trial judge, taking into account the nature of the misrepresentation and losses to both parties.

Citation
[2010] NICA 25
Parties
Plaintiff/appellant: Odyssey Cinemas Limited; Defendant/respondent: Village Theatres Three Limited; Third Party: Sheridan Millennium Limited
Jurisdiction
Northern Ireland
Judgment Date
02 June 2010
Procedural Posture
Appeal From High Court (chancery Division) / Remitted to Trial Judge for Reconsideration of Remedy
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part; action remitted to trial judge to reconsider remedy (rescission or damages).
Legal Topics
Misrepresentation, Fraud, Negligence, Contributory Negligence, Remedies, Rescission, Damages
Contract Law Tort Law Misrepresentation Fraud Negligence Contributory Negligence Remedies Rescission +1 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 3 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Odyssey Cinemas Limited

Plaintiff/appellant

Village Theatres Three Limited

Defendant/respondent

Sheridan Millennium Limited

Third Party

Procedural Posture

Appeal From High Court (chancery Division) / Remitted to Trial Judge for Reconsideration of Remedy

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the respondent made a fraudulent or negligent misrepresentation
  2. 2 Whether the appellant was guilty of contributory negligence
  3. 3 Whether rescission or damages is the appropriate remedy

Ratio Decidendi

The respondent's misrepresentation was negligent, not fraudulent; the trial judge was correct in rejecting fraudulent misrepresentation. Damages for misrepresentation and breach of warranty should not be reduced for contributory negligence. Remedy (rescission or damages) must be reconsidered by the trial judge, taking into account the nature of the misrepresentation and losses to both parties.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part; action remitted to trial judge to reconsider remedy (rescission or damages).

Orders

  • Trial judge to reconsider whether rescission should be refused or damages awarded, taking into account this judgment.
  • Damages for breach of warranty and misrepresentation not to be reduced for contributory negligence.