Direct link Share on

The Commercial Court has found in favour of Mr Greenhouse (represented by Andrew George QC and Daniel Cashman) on every issue before it, in relation to a contractual commission dispute in the gambling/electronic payment sector.

The Defendant operates an online payment business, particularly used in the gambling sector. The Claimant, Mr Greenhouse, had a contract with the Defendant entitling him to commission in respect of individuals referred by him to the Defendant’s services. He claimed for unpaid commission and damages, arising from six separate issues before the Court. Two of the issues were conceded by the Defendant during the course of proceedings.

Two of the remaining issues considered the application of the legal tests for contractual variation, implication of terms, and promissory estoppel. The Commercial Court (Andrew Burrows QC sitting as a Judge of the High Court) held that, in respect of each of those issues raised, the Defendant had been unable to satisfy the relevant legal tests.

A further issue considered the Defendant’s purported unilateral notice of amendment pursuant to an express contractual right. The Court held that such unilateral notice, once given, could not be unilaterally withdrawn. The Court also considered what might be required to find that there was consensual withdrawal of the notice. On the facts, the Court held that unilateral notice had not been given effectively.

There was also a dispute about whether the Defendant’s contractual reporting obligation survived termination of the agreement. The Court held that – given that the obligation was ancillary to an ongoing obligation to pay commission – the obligation survived.

There will be a further hearing to determine remedy.

Clerks

Staff