• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

The commercial advantages of agreed remedies are so extensive that the courts should almost invariably give effect to them. Discuss.

Extracts from this document...


"The commercial advantages of agreed remedies are so extensive that the courts should almost invariably give effect to them." Discuss. This essay will examine the advantages and disadvantages of liquidated damages, deposits and forfeiture of property as agreed remedies. It will be argued that courts should give effect to agreed remedies unless there are sound justifications to do otherwise. I will analyse the way the court has regulated agreed remedies and submit that the law lacks an overarching coherent principle and contains areas of incoherency. It will be concluded that the advantages of agreed remedies outweigh its disadvantages especially in a commercial context, but that does not mean the court should invariably give effect to them. There are many types of agreed remedies and three will be discussed in this essay. Firstly, a liquidated damages clause is an agreement to pay a fix sum of money when the contract is breached.1 Secondly, a deposit is a sum of money paid in advance as an earnest of future performance which is forfeited if the contract is breached by the depositor.2 Thirdly, forfeiture of proprietary interests is the loss of right to use a property and the property may be repossessed.3 The commercial advantages of an agreed remedy clause are manifold.4 Agreed remedies clause reduces uncertainties about level of compensation when a breach occurs; if the remedy is a liquidated sum, applicant can apply through a quicker court procedure for debt due; agreed remedy enables parties to allocate their risks in advance; it may circumvent difficulties in proving speculative losses in court, which may otherwise fail for want of proof; it (e.g. ...read more.


Firstly, fairness is not the standard which the courts employ. Because deposit only has to be set at a reasonable rate with reference to customs of trade, the amount of justifiable deposit may be unrelated to the actual loss suffered by the injured party.19 Therefore, it seems the at the court is concerned with commercial reasonableness rather than fairness. Secondly, fairness is a vague concept which does not explain how the court decided to use the reasonable test. For example, the court could have tested deposits according to the actual loss suffered and still claimed the standard to be based on consideration of fairness. No justification is provided by the courts as to the difference in standards for testing deposits and penalty clauses. A possible explanation may be that courts have developed responsively to different types of agreed remedies in an ad hoc manner and consequently, there are no overarching coherent principles or uniformity of standards for testing the fairness of deposits and penalty clauses. In relation to forfeiture of property, it is also regulated and courts may grant a relief from forfeiture so that property is not repossessed. Relief would normally be granted if the rights confer a proprietary interest; proprietary interest is added to contract as security for performance; and time is not of the essence.20 The main problem with granting a relief is it only applies to certain proprietary or possessory interest.21 In Sport International22, relief was not granted for a contractual licence for use of trademark; Whereas in BICC,23 relief was grant for joint proprietary interests in patent rights. ...read more.


the loss suffered whenever the amount contracted is more than the actual loss suffered, instead of invalidating clauses for not being a genuine pre-estimate. Compare civil law approaches which seem to accord more closely with the concept of corrective justice. 17 See Beckham v Drake 9 E.R. 1213 where the court invalidated the penalty clause and awarding ordinary damages with accurate assessment of fair measure of compensation for loss. 18 Workers Trust & Merchant Bank Ltd v Dojap Investments Ltd [1993] A.C. 573 19 See e.g. Union Eagle Ltd. v. Golden Achievements Ltd. [1997] 2 All ER 215 or Hyundai Shipbuilding and Heavy Industries Ltd. v. Papadopoulos [1980] 1 WLR 1129 20 See Dillon LJ in BICC plc v Burndy Corp [1985] Ch 232, CA; see also On Demand Information plc v Michael Gerson (Finance) plc [2002] UKHL 13 21 The Scaptrade [1983] 2 AC 694, HL, where the court concluded that a contract for services does not qualify for relief from forfeiture. 22 Sport International Bussum v. Inter-Footwear Ltd [1984] 1 WLR 776 23 BICC plc v Burndy Corp [1985] Ch 232, CA 24 Hugh Collins, The Law of Contract, p.387 25 Smith, 'Relief Against Forfeiture: A Restatement' [2001] CL 178, p. 194; See for example, in Sport International, the business was ruined because of a delay in arranging a bank guarantee, but the payment for using the trademark was still satisfied and the plaintiff was not affected. 26 Smith, 'Relief Against Forfeiture: A Restatement' [2001] CL 178, p.186 27 Hugh Collins, The Law of Contract, pp.387-8 ?? ?? ?? ?? Page 1 ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our University Degree Commercial Law section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related University Degree Commercial Law essays

  1. The World Trade Organization and Its Critics

    They also argued that free trade leads to divergence rather than the convergence of income levels within affluent and underprivileged countries and against the absence of a fa?e for voicing opinions which further alienates the concerns of environmentalist, workers, unions, consumers and human rights groups.

  2. Reform of the ultra vires rule.

    one director or any two or more directors purporting to act on behalf of the company, is uncertain, although there is an obiter dictum in one case that the statutory protection of the other party applies in all of these situations (International Sales and Agencies Ltd v Marcus [1982] 3 All ER 551).

  1. Introduction to Commercial Law. Discuss the advantages and disadvantages of resolving a civil ...

    Prison b) Fine c) Death Penalty d) Corporal Punishment (canning) Burden and standard of proof On the balance of probabilities. The claimant has to prove that on the balance of probabilities the defendant was in the wrong or liable. This means that a judge or jury must believe the claimant's story and evidence more than the defendant's version.

  2. The Policy Defence - Excessive in Implementation? Prior to ...

    He believes that the events leading to the reforms started in 1992 with the remodelling of Australia's tort system to follow the American's. This led to a culture of 'blame'34 that was recognized in the ministerial meeting on public liability35.

  1. The Criminal Justice Act 1993 (CJA) and the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 ...

    enforce an action for breach of fiduciary duty has been relatively scarce.[18] CJA 1993 had been criticised as for its failure to alter the manner in which insider dealing law operates or the means by which it is enforced under the previous law, as no new civil penalties are bring

  2. Union Carbide & Bhopal Case

    1993 Oct U.S. Supreme Court Denies Hearing on Legal Standing The U.S. Supreme Court declines to hear appeal of lower court from the Bhopal victims. It suggests that the Bhopal victims may not sue for damages in U.S. courts, based on previous ruling regarding the transfer of litigation to India, and the settlement made in India.

  1. Exclusionary principles

    This was justified by Lord Wilberforce on the basis that prior negotiation would be of no use, as the parties position would be constantly shifting till the conclusion of written agreement. Prior negotiations define parties? subjective intentions, therefore serves no function in deducing the objective intention of both parties.

  2. Section 205 of the companies Act 1963 provides a comprehensive remedy for aggrieved shareholders. ...

    In this instance, the court did not find any evidence to suggest that the ordinary shareholders had been oppressed. Barrington J. was satisfied that the preference shareholders had acted honestly and fairly in their distribution of the dividends to the shareholders, yet he acknowledged that oppression was not the sole conduct prohibited under s 205.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work