Last updateTue, 24 Feb 2015 5pm

PRACTICE: Careless talk

05 June 2015  

Paul Chaplin examines an unintended agreement

In the recent case of Bieber v Teathers Ltd (in liquidation) [2014], the court considered whether an exchange of emails by parties’ solicitors constituted a binding settlement agreement. In coming to its conclusion the court carried out an objective appraisal of the parties’ words and conduct during their negotiations to determine whether they had intended to conclude a legally binding agreement.

Additional Info

  • Case(s) Referenced:

    AB & anor v CD Ltd [2013] EWHC 1376 (TCC)

    Air Studios (Lyndhurst) Ltd (t/a Air Entertainment Group) v Lombard North Central plc [2012] EWHC 3162 (QB)

    Bieber & ors v Teathers Ltd [2014] EWHC 4205 (Ch)

    Newbury v Sun Microsystems [2013] EWHC 2180 (QB)

    Pagnan SpA v Feed Products Ltd [1987] 2 Lloyd’s Rep 601

    RTS Flexible Systems Ltd v Molkerei Alois Muller GmbH & Co KG [2010] UKSC 14

    Whitehead Mann Ltd v Cheverny Consulting Ltd [2006] EWCA Civ 1303

    Winn v Bull (1877) 7 Ch D 29