C was supplier of software to D under a licence agreement that involved payment of a maintenance fee each year until such time as D gave written notice to C that it no longer required maintenance. In 2007, D purchased a licence extension that provided (amongst other things) as follows: “At the Customer's option, annual maintenance for the licence extension (including upgrade) contained herein for the period 26th October 2007 to 25th October 2008 shall be 17.5% of £750,000” ...
|
D was contracted to store memory cards for C’s PlayStation 2 console and deliver them to C’s UK customers. X was a repeat customer of C’s and regularly ordered shipments of several thousand cards. The cards comprising one such shipment were stolen while in D’s custody. It was common ground that D was liable to make good C’s losses, but a dispute arose as to the correct measure of loss. C, having refunded X, argued it was entitled to recover the full sale price from D; D argued that recovery shou ...
|
D was the main contractor for the provision of IT services to the NHS. The contract between the parties stated that in the event of a dispute the parties would refer the matter to arbitration. However, there was an exception for interim injunctions. D had subcontracted certain services to C who had then licensed those programmes to D. It was alleged that D had started using more licences than it had paid for and C referred the dispute to arbitration. Once the arbitration had commenced C leant th ...
|
D was a supplier of IT services to various government departments. C had supplied mainframe computers to D including some computers used to back up other "live" mainframe computers in the case of disaster. C licensed D to use C's operating system and associated software and also provided repair, maintenance and support services for the mainframes (the live estate). The parties had entered into two agreements (1) an umbrella agreement providing for payment for licensing and system services; and ...
|
The three judgments of this unanimous decision set out the principles which will determine whether procedural defects in the establishment of an arbitral tribunal will justify a jurisdictional challenge to the award – a topic on which there is little English authority. C had entered into a contract with D to create a prototype website for the government of Namibia. The contract included a term providing for disputes to be referred to the Commonwealth Secretariat Arbitral Tribunal (“CSAT”) for ...
|
C was retained by a healthcare company to develop financial forecasting software. C entered into financial difficulties itself and D1, a computer programmer and a director of C, refused to continue working for C. At a meeting it was agreed that D1 and D3 would complete development of the software and would be paid by the customer via D2 (a company controlled by D1). It was also agreed that C would receive a percentage of those payments as a "finder's fee". C subsequently claimed copyright in t ...
|
D was a designer and supplier of engine control units to the racing car industry. C had been engaged by D to advise on the design of the layout of printed circuit boards used in two successive versions of the control units. C alleged that the circuit layouts that resulted from those services caused malfunctioning of the circuit boards and control units and claimed that the contract contained an implied term of fitness for purpose. D denied liability and alleged (i) that C's decision to use bli ...
|
D was a designer and supplier of engine control units to the racing car industry. C had been engaged by D to advise on the design of the layout of printed circuit boards used in two successive versions of the control units. C alleged that the circuit layouts that resulted from those services caused malfunctioning of the circuit boards and control units and claimed that the contract contained an implied term of fitness for purpose. D denied liability and alleged (i) that C's decision to use bli ...
|
D1, D2 and D3 had been employed by C as senior executives. A’s employment contract provided that he should not have any other job or be interested in any other business during his contract of employment without C's written consent. During the course of their employment, D1, D2 and D3 formed a company (D4) which D5 later joined. D1, D3 and D5 resigned but not before removing confidential information (comprising lists of potential customers, suppliers and advertisers). D3 remained in post in order ...
|
C was the registered owner of a number of UK and Community trade marks including the ‘INTEL’. The goods and services covered by the registrations were for computers and computer-linked goods and services. D had registered a trade mark consisting of the word ‘INTELMARK’ in relation to integrated telephone marketing. C sought a declaration of invalidity on the basis that D's use of the later mark would take unfair advantage of, or be detrimental to, the distinctive character or the repute of C's t ...
|
| 1 2 3 4 |