Commercial Regulation – Corporate Law – Joint Undertaking – Contractual Building of Clause in Joint Enterprise

The circumstance of Nearfield Ltd v Lincoln Nominees Ltd and Yet another [2006], dealt with the situation of the building of a contractual phrase in an agreement. The first defendant was a nominee firm of the next defendant. The to start with defendant was included in the British Virgin Islands.

In April 2002, the claimant company entered into a joint undertaking settlement (“the JVA”) for the redevelopment of a particular property. Below clause 4.1 of the JVA, the claimant was less than an obligation to advance a personal loan of £3,000,000 to the initially defendant. In accordance to clause 5.1.3, the period of the financial loan would be for a few years from the date of the personal loan. Immediately after three decades, the second defendant would ‘procure’ the payment of the mortgage together with all exceptional fascination on penned need by the claimant.

The redevelopment of the residence was not thriving and so the assets was subsequently sold. Although some payment was built to the claimant, the shortfall was £2,251,406.23 moreover interest of £1,030,947.35. The claimant sought to implement clause 5.1.3 of the JVA.

The claimant submitted that ‘procure’ in clause 5.1.3 put an obligation on the next defendant to make certain the to start with defendant repaid the sum of £ 3,000,000 jointly with fantastic passions on published demand by the claimant. They argued that in the function of a failure by the very first defendant to make the payment, it was liable to pay damages equivalent to the volume payable but not repaid by the initially defendant.

The second defendant contended that the extent of its obligation underneath clause 5.1.3 was just to seek out to deliver about the compensation of the bank loan by the 1st defendant and did not extend even further so as to deliver any assurance or warranty that the financial loan would be repaid in complete by the 1st defendant.

The assert was permitted.

The which means which a doc would convey to a affordable male was not the exact detail as the which means of its real words and phrases. The court held that the that means of text was a subject of dictionaries and grammars, although the meaning of the doc in problem was what the events applying those text in conjunction with the relevant track record would fairly have been understood to indicate.

The typical meaning of the phrase procure was to ‘see to it’. Consequently a particular person agreeing to procure that a third celebration executed a contractual obligation experienced to have out the pursuing:

– They would be required to try to make positive that the 3rd get together complied with the obligation and

– In the event that the 3rd bash failed to comply, they would have to spend damages calculated by the amount of money that should to have been paid out by the third social gathering.

There was nothing in the correspondence in between the get-togethers in this case which advised that ‘procure’ underneath clause 5.1.3 should be given a distinct that means in various parts of the JVA, nor could it be instructed that ‘procure’ intended something other than as the claimant place it: particularly that it meant ‘see to it’.

In addition, there was no limitation expressed in the JVA and it could simply have been done. Hence, it was held that clause 5.1.3 must be construed as the claimant experienced submitted. In any occasion, there was no document or any evidence from the drafts primary up to the JVA which could have led to a unique conclusion.

The court resolved that the next defendant was liable to ‘procure’ that the to start with defendant repaid the mortgage to the claimant.

Remark: Get-togethers have to always restrict the extent of their liabilities when moving into joint ventures.

Make sure you get hold of us for extra info on examining damages owing less than termination of a agreement at [email protected]

Go to or

© RT COOPERS, 2007. This Briefing Notice does not offer a detailed or comprehensive statement of the law relating to the challenges talked about nor does it constitute legal advice. It is supposed only to highlight normal troubles. Professional lawful advice ought to normally be sought in relation to certain instances.

share this recipe:

Still hungry? Here’s more