Not quite sure how far this is a case of "following the approach of Leggatt J in Yam Seng Pte Ltd v International Trade Corpn". Granted, the DJ quoted the provocative remarks of Leggatt in Yam Seng. But he also quoted at [174] the much more sceptical (and in my view rather better-thought-out) remarks of Jackson LJ in Mid-Essex, and the more non-committal ones of Beatson LJ in the same case.

In any case, there was no serious doubt that this was one of the special types of contract where good-faith-style duties have always been implicit in any case under English law, so there was no need to decide whether Leggatt was right in saying that it was high time we towed the line on good faith generally (which, of course, is a line strongly taken in the DCFR and other progressive documents).

In other words, my own take is that Bristol Groundschool is no big deal.

Andrew



On 04/07/14 10:28, Hector MacQueen wrote:

An English High Court decision of fairly monstrous length in which however Deputy Judge Richard Spearman finds an implied duty of good faith in a contract, following the approach of Leggatt J in Yam Seng Pte Ltd v International Trade Corpn [2013] EWHC 111; but also holds that the duty was not breached.  The context is one of a claim of repudiatory breach of the contract, also unsuccessful.

Bristol Groundschool Ltd v IDC Ltd and others [2014] EWHC 2145 (Ch)http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Ch/2014/2145.html, paras 172-197.

Hector