McAdam v. Boxpak Ltd [2006] ScotCS CSIH_9 (16 February 2006)

McAdam v. Boxpak Ltd [2006] ScotCS CSIH_9 (16 February 2006)

The pursuer's activities as a commercial agent were secondary because the arrangement did not satisfy the requirement that the agent was engaged to develop goodwill in the principal's business. The goodwill and market dominance attached to the pursuer, not the defenders. The indications in the Schedule supported the conclusion that the agency was secondary, and thus the 1993 Regulations did not apply.

Citation
[2006] ScotCS CSIH_9
Parties
Pursuer and Appellant: Duncan McAdam; Defenders and Respondents: Boxpak Limited
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
16 February 2006
Procedural Posture
Appeal / Appeal From Sheriff Principal to Court of Session (inner House, Extra Division)
Outcome
Appeal refused
Legal Topics
Commercial Agency, Secondary Agency, Goodwill, Interpretation of Commercial Agents (council Directive) Regulations 1993, Application of EU Directive 86/653/eec, Indemnity and Compensation on Termination of Agency
Commercial Law Agency Law European Union Law Commercial Agency Secondary Agency Goodwill Interpretation of Commercial Agents (council Directive) Regulations 1993 Application of EU Directive 86/653/eec +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 4 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Duncan McAdam

Pursuer and Appellant

Boxpak Limited

Defenders and Respondents

Procedural Posture

Appeal / Appeal From Sheriff Principal to Court of Session (inner House, Extra Division)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the pursuer was a 'commercial agent' within the meaning of the Commercial Agents (Council Directive) Regulations 1993
  2. 2 Whether the pursuer's activities were 'secondary' under the Schedule to the Regulations, thus excluding him from protection
  3. 3 Whether the arrangement was in the commercial interests of the principal and developed goodwill for the principal

Ratio Decidendi

The pursuer's activities as a commercial agent were secondary because the arrangement did not satisfy the requirement that the agent was engaged to develop goodwill in the principal's business. The goodwill and market dominance attached to the pursuer, not the defenders. The indications in the Schedule supported the conclusion that the agency was secondary, and thus the 1993 Regulations did not apply.

Court Disposition

Appeal refused

Orders

  • The appeal is refused.