Authors

The Supreme Court's decision in Marks & Spencer v BNP Paribas Securities Services Trust Co (Jersey) Ltd in late 2015 reaffirmed the traditional approach to implied terms, putting to rest the suggestion made by some practitioners and academics that the Privy Council's decision in Attorney General of Belize v Belize Telecom (and, in particular, Lord Hoffman's opinion) had heralded a more liberal approach.

In Irish Bank Resolution Corporation Ltd (In Special Liquidation) v Camden Market Holdings Corp & Ors the Court of Appeal applied Marks & Spencer and provided a useful reminder of the principle that an implied term cannot contradict an express term of a contract.

Related Capabilities

Practices –

Latest Perspectives

View More