Wilkes Successful in Reported Case – Standard Terms Do Not Mean Standard Results!
Earlier this year, Wilkes successfully represented a client (“TWL”) in defending an application for summary judgment, in a case that was subsequently published in the Law Reports. The case is an important reminder that relying on standard terms and conditions – even industry approved ones – does not always guarantee the desired result.
In this case TWL was the claimant against a company (“JGL”), which had been hired as its’ customs agent to deal with the importation of steel wire products from the EU, with the aim of minimising or eliminating its’ tax liabilities arising from those imports. TWL alleges that JGL failed to deal with HMRC’s importation computer system properly, resulting in a large tax bill for TWL.
TWL issued proceedings for damages. JGL contended that their standard terms of business (in common use in the industry) contained a provision barring any claims brought more than 9 months from “the date of the event or occurrence [giving] rise to a cause of action”.
JGL argued that this 9 month period ran from the date of the final import entry in question – which was in June 2021 – and that consequently any claim brought after March 2022 was time barred.
TWL argued that in March 2022, it did not even know it was subject to any tax liability and therefore did not know that it had a claim to bring. TWL only knew of the tax liability in August 2022 when HMRC wrote to it to inform it of the same. TWL’s claim was brought within 9 months of that notification.
In applying for summary judgement on the claim, JGL relied on two previous cases in which the Court of Appeal had held those same terms to be reasonable. TWL opposed the application on the basis that the 9 month time limit was unreasonable under the provisions of the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977, and so was unenforceable.
TWL was successful and the application was dismissed by HHJ Worster. The Judge found that on the facts of this particular case, there was a real prospect of TWL establishing that the 9 month term was unreasonable. It was not appropriate to “import” a decision on reasonableness from another case, even if it relates to the same terms. Each case has to be determined on its own facts when it comes to the reasonableness of standard terms. JGL’s summary judgment application was dismissed, and the case would proceed toward a trial.
A copy of the judgment can be found here :- https://caselaw.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ewhc/kb/2024/212
Subsequently the parties successfully negotiated a settlement of the claim without the need for the case to go to trial.
TWL was represented at the summary judgment hearing by Counsel, Ali Tabari of St Philips Chambers, instructed by Gavin Evans, a Partner in Wilkes’ Commercial Dispute Resolution Department. Gavin comments:-
“This was a really interesting and hard fought application. Though we were always confident of success, it is always reassuring when the Judge accepts your arguments and finds in favour of your client. Dealing with a fully contested application lasting most of the day, which this was, requires a lot of careful preparation and it was great to see that hard work pay off with an excellent result for our client. That result was a necessary step in securing a satisfactory resolution to the case for our client.”
The Commercial Dispute Resolution team at Wilkes deal with contested applications of this nature on a regular basis and have an excellent track record in resolving disputes effectively without the costs, stress and uncertainties of a full trial. For more information or to discuss a commercial dispute please contact Gavin Evans on 0121 233 433 or by email at [email protected].
