Hardie Polymers Ltd v Polymerland Ltd [2001] ScotCS 243 (31 October 2001)

Hardie Polymers Ltd v Polymerland Ltd [2001] ScotCS 243 (31 October 2001)

Article 10 of the Agreement, despite its heading, is properly construed as an election for indemnity and not compensation, as its substantive terms mirror the statutory provisions for indemnity under Regulation 17(3)-(5), and the use of 'compensation' in the heading does not override the clear intention expressed in the body of the article.

Citation
[2001] ScotCS 243
Parties
Pursuer: Hardie Polymers Limited; Defender: Polymerland Limited
Jurisdiction
Scotland
Judgment Date
31 October 2001
Procedural Posture
Commercial Agency Contract Dispute / Debate on Relevancy of Averments Regarding Compensation Claim
Outcome
Pursuers' claim for compensation dismissed; proof before answer allowed on remaining issues.
Legal Topics
Commercial Agency Termination, Indemnity Vs Compensation, Interpretation of Agency Contracts, Implementation of EU Directives
Commercial Law Contract Law Agency Law Commercial Agency Termination Indemnity Vs Compensation Interpretation of Agency Contracts Implementation of EU Directives

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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Hardie Polymers Limited

Pursuer

Polymerland Limited

Defender

Procedural Posture

Commercial Agency Contract Dispute / Debate on Relevancy of Averments Regarding Compensation Claim

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the agency contract provided for indemnity or compensation upon termination under the Commercial Agents (Council Directive) Regulations 1993
  2. 2 Whether the pursuers are entitled to claim compensation or only indemnity

Ratio Decidendi

Article 10 of the Agreement, despite its heading, is properly construed as an election for indemnity and not compensation, as its substantive terms mirror the statutory provisions for indemnity under Regulation 17(3)-(5), and the use of 'compensation' in the heading does not override the clear intention expressed in the body of the article.

Court Disposition

Pursuers' claim for compensation dismissed; proof before answer allowed on remaining issues.

Orders

  • Sustain defenders' first plea-in-law to the extent of excluding from probation the averments in article 6 of the condescendence.
  • Repel pursuers' third and fourth pleas-in-law.